.,,.*^^^ '   '"%.. 


PRINCETON.  N.  J. 


3r 


Library  of  Dr.  A.  A.  Hodge.     Presented. 


BS  651  .T67  1881 
Townsend,  L.  T.  1838-1922 
The  Mosaic  record  and  moder; 
science 


>K 


THE 


MOSAIC  RECORD  AND  MODERN  SCIENCE. 


By    L.   T.   TOWNSEND,   D.  D. 

AUTHOR    OF    "credo,"    ETC. 


I  have  noticed  that  when  theological  writers  can  be  induced  to  stick  to  the 
literal  account  in  Genesis,  and  scientists  to  the  pure  facts,  that  the  two  records 
have  a  very  wonderful  correspondence. 

Pres.  McCosh. 


BOSTON: 

HOWARD     GANNETT. 

iSSi. 


COPYRIGHT, 

ISSO, 
By  Howard  Gannett. 


Electrotyped  at  the  Boston  Stereotype  Foundry, 
No.  4  Pearl  Street. 


PREFACE. 


Maxy  Sabbath-sehool  workers  and  Bible  students  have  felt 
and  expressed  surprise  that  during  the  late  discussions  and 
explanations  of  the  International  Lesson  Series,  the  Mosaic 
account  of  creation  received  such  unsatisfactory  defence. 
Though  familiar  with  the  current  difficulties  and  objections, 
and  in  some  instances  unable  to  answer  them,  still  the  teacher 
and  the  student  had  not  been  alarmed;  they  presumed,  that, 
when  this  subject  should  be  critically  examined  and  commented 
upon  by  the  pulpit  and  the  press,  perfectly  satisfactory  expla- 
nations would  be  given.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact,  we  have  to 
confess  that  a  large  number  of  even  the  more  common  objec- 
tions either  were  not  well  met,  or  were  passed  in  silence. 

N'ow,  only  a  moment's  reflection  is  needed  to  show  how  un- 
reasonable is  the  demand  that  all  difficulties  should  be  exhaust- 
ively examined  and  satisfactorily  reviewed  in  the  studies  of  a 
few  weeks.  The  space  devoted  to  the  introductory  chapters  of 
Genesis  was  necessarily  too  limited,  the  scientific  researches 
demanded  were  too  extensive,  and  the  theological  and  exeget- 
ical  questions  involved  were  too  profound  to  admit,  "within  the 

3 


PEEFACE. 


limits  of  International  Series,  anything  like  exhaustive  treat- 
ment. 

These  facts,  and  the  many  new  questions  raised,  together 
with  the  interest  developed  in  the  minds  of  all  the  friends 
of  the  Bible,  have  led  the  author  to  contribute  the  follow- 
ing brief  treatise  to  the  general  literature  belonging  to  this 
somewhat  difficult  and  perplexing  subject. 


CONTENTS. 


I.     Conflict  of  Theories, 


II.  Cos-MicAL  Periods:     the  First,   Second,  and  Third,  ....  11 

III.  CosMiCAL  Periods:    the  Fourth,  Fifth,  and  Sixth,         .         .  •     .         .  17 

IV.  The  L.VW  of  Type  and  Antitype, 2G 

V.  Chaos  and  Mosaic  Days, 29 

VI.  Mosaic  Days:    the  First,   Second,  ai;d  Third, 31 

VII.  Mosaic  Days:    the   Fourth,  Fifth,  and  Sixth, 35 

VIII.  The  Seventh  Day, 38 

IX.  Origin  of  Light  and  Life,   and  the  Creation  of  Man,  .         .         .         .  41 


Supplemental  Notes. 01 


THE 


MOSAIC  RECORD  AND  MODERN  SCIENCE. 


I. 

CONTLTCT  OF   THEOKIES. 


The  Christian  student,  while  examining  the  different  scientific  theo- 
ries of  the  origin  of  the  world,  aiul  while  studying  the  various  inter- 
pretations given  to  the  Mosaic  record,  is  ofte^i  left  to  wonder  if  these 
conflicting  opinions  can  ever  be  reduced  to  anything  like  consistency. 

Controversies  upon  these  subjects  have  arisen,  not  exclusively  be- 
tween skeptical  scientists  and  religionists,  but  have  also  been  warm 
and  exciting  even  among  those  who  are  firm  believers  in  the  truths  of 
Revelation. 

There  have  been  those,  for  instance,  who  maintain  that  the  Bible 
teaches,  beyond  question,  t-hat  God,  in  six  ordinary  days,  begun  the 
world  and  brought  it,  during  that  brief  period,  to  its  present  inhabitable 
condition.  The  more  scientific  believer  replies,  however,  that,  judging 
from  a  candid  view  of  facts,  it  cannot  be  possible  that  the  various  geo- 
logical deposits  could  have  been  arranged  without  consuming  millions 
of  years.  But  to  this  it  is  sometimes  rejoined,  that  God  couhl  have 
created  the  geological  deposits  and  fossils  just  as  they  now  are  as  well 
as  to  have  created  them  in  any  other  way.  That  he  could  have  done 
this,  no  firm  believer  in  the  supernatural  doubts,  but  that  he  did  this, 
no  intelligent  believer  at  present  will  for  a  moment  admit. 

7 


o  MOSAIC   EECOED 

On  the  other  hand,  a  large  number  of  Christian  scholars  evade  the 
scientific  difficulties  involved  in  the  literal  six-days'  theorv  bv  assertincr 
that  the  word  "  day,"  as  used  in  the  first  and  second  chapters  of  Genesis, 
means  a  period  of  indefinite  length.  Hence,  according  to  this  interpre- 
tation, all  that^is  required  to  establish  a  harmony  between  science  and 
Revelation,  is  to  show  that  the  general  order  of  development  is  essen- 
tially the  same  in  both  the  Mosaic  and  scientific  records.  This,  it  mav 
be  remarked,  is  the  view  now  maintained  by  perhaps  the  majoritv  of 
scholarly  commentators  and  scientific  believers,  w^ho  durino-  the  last 
fifteen  or  twenty  years  have  written  upon  these  subjects. 

That  this  theory  is  entirely  free  from  embarrassments,  however,  none 
of  its  advocates  venture  to  affirm.  It  may  be,  and  certainly  is,  a  tempo- 
rary relief  from  scientific,  but  it  is  not  a  relief  from  exegetical  difficulties. 
Indeed,  no  one,  unless  in  support  of  some  favorite  theorv,  or  to  escape 
some  embarrassment,  would  read  the  Mosaic  account  thinking  for  a 
moment  of  any  period  except  that  of  a  literal  dav.  And  further,  this, 
which  seems  to  be  the  natural  interpretation  of  common  sense,  is  like- 
wise supported  by  some  of  the  ablest  and  most  critical  Hebrew  scholars 
of  both  ancient  and  modern  date.  Says  Baumgarten :  "  The  word  '  day,' 
the  Hebrew  Tom,  is  primarily  day,  and  not  period;  and  here  (in  Genesis) 
this  word  is  used  for  the  first  time."  Rosenmiiller  contends,  also,  that 
this  Mosaic  account  cannot  possibly  be  made  to  mean  other  than  days 
of  twenty-four  hours'  length.  The  learned  and  eminent  Hebraist, 
Kalisch,  says,  "  It  is  philologically  impossible  to  understand  this  word 
'  da}' '  in  any  other  sense  than  as  a  period  of  twenty-four  hours."  Says 
Professor  Hedge,  in  his  Primeval  World,  "There  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  the  text  means  literally  days  of  twenty-four  hours."  Calwer, 
Hagenbach,  Keil,  Davidson,  and  Professor  Murphy  maintain  the  same 
opinion.  We  have  to  confess,  therefore,  that  the  usual  method  of 
explaining  the  Mosaic  account,  as  meaning  days  of  indefinite  length, 
is  not  such  as  can  easily  harmonize  the  facts  of  science  with  a  natural 
and  obvious  interpretation  of  the  Bible. 

Aside  from  the  length  of  days,  there  are  other  matters  in  controversy. 
For  instance,  not  a  few  writers,  adopting  the  theory  that  the  Bible  was 
never  designed  to  teach  science,  have  surrendered  all  claims  as  to  the 


AND   MODERN   SCIENCE.  9 

inspiration  of  the  Mosaic  account,  save  some  general  truths  as  to  God's 
creatorship.  The)'  have  styled  that  account,  in  the  words  of  Dr.  Cocker, 
"  poetical,  s3'rabolical,  and  unchronological."  Others  resolutely  oppose 
this  view,  and  say,  with  the  late  President  of  Amherst  College,  himself 
a  scientific  man  of  no  mean  rank,  "  If  the  supposed  results  of  scientific 
discovery  should  be  found  to  be  antagonistic  to  the  Bible,  I  should  cleave 
to  the  Bible  and  suspect  the  results."  ^  * 

Such  are  some  of  the  conflicting  views,  even  among  evangelical  be- 
lievers. 

Aside  from  these  controversies  found  within  the  household  of  faith, 
there  have  also  been  at  the  hands  of  pronounced  unbelievers  heavy  as- 
saults upon  the  Mosaic  record.  "  A  piece  of  stupidity  and  fraud,"  is  the 
charge  often  made.  Therefore  the  effort  to  find  a  harmonious  adjust- 
ment of  these  conflicting  opinions  of  theologians,  scientists,  and  skeptics, 
as  to  tlie  origin  and  formation  of  the  world,  seems  well-nigh  hopeless. 
Still,  while  the  Christian  has  faith  that  the  Bible  is  a  God-made  and  not  a 
man-made  book,  and  while  he  believes  that  the  same  Being  who  inspired 
the  Bible  also  created  the  universe,  and  must  therefore  have  known  how  it 
was  created,  there  is  but  one  course  to  pursue  —  keep  attempting  adjust- 
ments until  sooner  or  later  one  that  is  reasonable  and  harmonious  shall 
be  discovered.2 

•  At  the  cost  of  subsequent  repetition,  but  at  the  gain  of  clearness,  we 
briefly  outline  .a  theory  upon  this  perplexing  subject,  which  at  least 
somewhat  reduces  the  number  of  difirculties  heretofore  met  with.  This 
theory  maintains,  in  common  with  all  recognized  scientific  opinions  upon 
the  subject,  that  the  evolution  or  creation  of  the  physical  universe,  in- 
cluding our  earth,  has  consumed  periods  of  time  so  vast  that  the  human 
mind  cannot  comprehend  them.  With  those  who  hold  that  the  word 
"  day  "  is  indefinite,  our  theory  agrees  so  far  as  to  admit  that  apparently 
there  are,  in  geology  at  least,  six  well-marked -periods  "  of  activity," 
having  immense  durations,  which  may  be  properly  termed  cosmical,  or 
geological  days,  and  that  these  periods  are  prophetic  or  typical  of  six  literal 
days,  during  wdiich  the  Creator  brought  into  being  the  vegetable  and 

*  The  notes  in  tliis  volume  are  indicated  by  the  small  Arabic  numerals,  1,  2,  3,  &c.,  and 
coubtitute  the  Supplement.     (See  jj.  G1.) 


10  MOSAIC  RECORD 

animal  life  now  found  upon  the  earth's  surface.  It  will  be  noticed,  by 
adopting  this  theory,  that  we  avoid  a  quarrel  with  scientists  as  to  geo- 
logical durations,  all  the  time  being  allowed  that  can  reasonably  be  de- 
manded. Nor  need  we  quarrel  with  those  exegetes  who  apparently  are 
correct  when  insisting  that  the  word  "  day,"  used  in  connection  with 
"morning"  and  "  evening,"  must  mean  an  ordinary  day.  Each  ex- 
treme party  in  this  controversy,  we  concede,  has  truth  on  its  side,  but 
not  the  whole  truth. 


AND   MODERN   SCIENCE.  U 


IT. 

COSMICAL  PERIODS:    THE  FIRST,   SECOND,  AND 

THIRD. 

In  unfolding  the  subject,  we  first  call  attention  to  certain  ap- 
parently well-established  facts  as  to  the  beginning  of  things.  We  say, 
'apparently  well  established,'  in  order  to  allow  the  science  of  geology  to 
shift  its  ground  in  the  future,  as  in  the  past,  if  new  data  should  so 
require. 

The  field  before  us  is  immense.  In  traversing  it,  human  history  is  the 
first  informer,  carrying  back  the  student,  with  reliability,  however,  only 
a  few  thousand  years.  Nearly*  where  human  history  begins,  geological 
history  takes  the  student  and  conducts  him  with  something  of  a  firm 
tread  to  a  period  when  the  lowest  stratified  rocks  were  formed.  •  Bej^ond 
this  point,  geology  ventures  to  report  but  little. 

Next,  the  united  sciences  of  astronomy,  spectrum  analysis,  and  chem- 
istry, beginning  where  geology  is  compelled  to  stop,  aided  by  analogical 
arguments  and  reasonable  conjectures,  carry  the  student  back  to  the 
realms  of  those  invisible  forces  which  must  have  produced  visible 
phenomena.  If  investigation  is  extended  further,  it  will  be  found  that 
history,  geolog}^  astrononi}-,  spectrum  analysis,  and  chemistry  are  com- 
pelled to  commit  all  additional  research  to  theology,  which  deals  with 
data  that  lie  beyond  the  reach  of  all  other  sciences. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  nebula  hypothesis  has  such  strong  sup- 
port, being  first  propounded  by  Swedenborg,  accepted  by  Kant,  elab- 
orated by  Laplace  and  Herschel,  having  also  been  held  and  variously 
applied  by  such  scientists  as  Cuvier,  Humboldt,  Arago,  Guyot,  Nichol, 
Proctor,  and  Dana,  we  feel  justified  in  adopting  it,  at  least  as  a  work- 
ing hypothesis.3 

Keeping  for  the  present  witliin  the  circle  of  the  natural  sciences,  the 
comparatively  well-supported  induction  quickly  follows,  that,  first  of  all. 


12  MOSAIC   RECORD 

and  back  of  all,  there  was  a  dark  and  empty  universe.  From  some 
cause,  by  creative  power,  or  by  chance,  or  by  the  nature  of  thino-s,  or 
otherwise,  this  empty  space  was  filled,  fully  or  partly,  with  highly  illu- 
minated and  highly  rarefied  "  star-fire"  or  "  star-stuff,"  And  this  change 
from  darkness  to  light,  science  likewise  affirms,  must  have  been  instan- 
taneous. 

It  is  well  to  bear  in  mind  at  this  point  that  one  of  the  most  pronounced 
postulates  of  modern  science  is,  that  there  can  be  no  effect  without  an 
adequate  cause.  This  compels  science  to  take  the  additional  step,  that  an 
invisible  and  unknown,  but  nevertheless  a  Potent  Agency,  evoked  from 
the  invisible  and  unknown,  this  star-stuff,  and  then  while  the  star-stuff 
was  enveloped  in  primitive  darkness,  and  while  it  was  itself  darkness, 
that  same  Potent  Agency  which  evoked  it  into  being,  also  set  it  on  fire, 
and  thereby  dissipated  the  darkness  of  a  past  eternity. 

Let  it  be  observed  that  we  do  not  yet  attribute  to  science  the  word 
God.  We  go  no  further  than  pure  science  authorizes  us.  The  terms  we 
use  are,  an  invisible  and  unknown,  but  Potent  Agency,  and  it  was  this 
which  brbught  into  existence  that  which  was  not.'* 

How  or  why  this  Potent  Agency  brought  "  star-stuff "  or  "  light- 
stuff"  into  being,  or  definitely  what  this  Potent  Agency  itself  is,  phj^si- 
cal  science  cannot  from  the  nature  of  the  case  report  ;  it  should  there- 
fore properly  refer  for  information  to  theology.  But  until  new  scientific 
information  reaches  us,  we  shall  venture  to  fill  this  practically  atheistic 
(not  scientific)  hiatus  with  the  sublime  words  with  which  Moses 
describes  certain  later  phenomena  that  were  typified  by  those  events 
which  transpired  millions  of  ages  earlier  :  "  And  God  said.  Let  there  be 
light;  and  there  was  light." 

There  followed  in  order  of  time,  according  to  astronomical  and  geo- 
logical history,  a  distinct  "  epoch  of  development."  The  universally 
diffused  "  star-fire,"  by  processes  of  concentration  and  condensation, 
formed  rings,  which,  as  Sir  William  Thomson  thinks,  resembled  in 
form  and  preliminary  movement  those  vapor-smoke  rings  that  on  a 
small  scale  are  sometimes  sent  out  of  a  locomotive  during  its  first  few 
exhausts. 

As  this  era  wore  on,  the  flaming  rings  broke  asunder  forming  distinct 


AND   MODERN    SCIENCE.  13 

masses  of  fire.  At  that  time  our  earth  threw  off  its  satellite  and  became 
a  well-defined  sun,  rolling  through  the  spaces  a  flaming  torch,  giving  out 
light  and  heat  as  does  the  sun  which  now  lights  and  warms  our  planetary 
system. 

In  a  word,  this  first  cosmical  day,  it  may  reasonably  be  concluded, 
witnessed  the  creation  of  light,  the  conversion  of  light,  through  pro- 
cesses of  condensation  into  rings,  then  into  globes  of  fire,  the  earth,  sun, 
moon,  and  stars  being  thereby  shaped,  and  brought  from  confusion  into 
order.  Or,  using  a  phrase  in  which  Herbert  Spencer  delights,  "  the 
homogeneous  became  heterogeneous."^  And  no  scientific  man,  be  he 
skeptic  or  believer,  can  do  better  than  say,  that  that  primal  darkness 
whicli  had  no  beginning,  and  that  morning  light  which  first  emblazoned 
the  spaces,  together  with  other  astronomical  phenomena,  constituted  the 
primitive  day  or  epoch  of  the  physical  universe,  or,  in  the  simple  yet 
scientifically  faultless  language  which  Moses  designed  for  later  phe- 
nomena :  "  And  God  saw  the  light,  that  it  ivas  good :  and  God  divided  the 
light  from  the  darkness.  And  God  called  the  light  Day,  and  the  dark- 
ness he  called  Night :  and  the  evening  and  the  morning  were  the  first 
day." 

The  length  of  that  epoch  is  beyond  all  our  powers  of  comprehension. 
It  could  not  have  been  less,  as  is  thought,  than  the  time  which  has 
elapsed  since  the  earth's  crust  began  to  form,  making,  therefore,  this  first 
creative  day  to  be,  according  to  the  earlier  estimates  of  Sir  William 
Tiiomson,  at  least  three  hundred  million  years. 

As  this  day  approached  its  evening  the  earth-fires  burned  less  in- 
tensely than  at  mid-day.  The  flames  at  length  entirely  ceased  to  leap 
up  from  the  earth's  surface.  They  smouldered,  and  then  a  solid  crust 
began  to  form.  The  surrounding  gases  were  condensed,  forming  water 
and  acids  which  were  precipitated  upon  the  earth,  hastening  its  cooling, 
and  also  corroding  and  dissolving  much  of  its  surface  materials.  And 
when  at  length  the  surface  fires  were  completely  out,  and  when  the 
crust  had  fully  formed,  though  still  hot  enough  to  throw  the  descending 
waters  back  in  the  form  of  steam,  and  while  these  masses  of  steam  and 
clouds  were  creeping  over  the  sky,  a  great  astronomical  night  shut  down 
upon  the  earth,  whose  first  day  had  consumed  these  hundreds  of  millions 


14  MOSAIC  BECOED 

of  years.  It  was  a  night  of  wildest  tliunder-storms.  "  An  overwhelm- 
ing pall  of  clouds,"  says  a  popular  lecturer,  "  covered  the  earth  at  this 
period,  which  at  length  fell  in  raindrops,  and  these  exploding  on  their 
encounter  in  mid-air  with  the  vapors  rising  from  the  earth,  produced  a 
universal  tempest  with  thunder  and  lightning,  which  tempest  lasted 
through  a  geological  period.  The  planet  Jupiter  is  now  passing  through 
this  stormy  period." 

How  long  this  black  pall  hung  over  the  earth  we  have  no  reliable 
means  of  knowing.  We  may  reasonably  conjecture  that  its  duration 
extended  through  yeavs,  numbered  by  millions.  The  close  of  this  night 
found  the  earth  entirely  deluged. 

Like  every  other  night,  this  one  was  at  length  greeted  by  a  dawn- 
light,  at  least  by  a  season  of  changed  geological  conditions,  formations, 
and  developments.  That  is,  geological  science  positively  reports  that 
the  primitive  crust  or  rock-bed  of  the  earth  was  anon  broken  up,  thereby 
disclosing  those  fires  which  had  been  concealed  through  the  previous 
night.  In  a  word,  the  terrestrial  fires  had  again  broken  out.  From  one 
pole  to  the  other,  and  round  its  entire  surface,  the  world  was  torn  by 
earthquakes,  and  was  lighted  up  in  every  direction  by  volcanic  fires. 
Huge  masses  of  the  primitive  stratified  rocks  were  piled  up  in  folds  and 
then  we're  repeatedly  sunk  in  these  seething  seas  of  liquid  fire. 

The  cause  assigned  by  science  for  these  mighty  physical  changes,  is, 
the  cooling  and  contracting  of  the  surface  matter  of  the  earth.  Of  these 
changes  and  revolutions  there  is  abundant  proof.  For  instance,  the 
oldest  rocks  of  which  geology  has  taken  note,  are  those  in  the  Lauren- 
tian  system,  belonging  to  the  Archcean  epoch.  But  these  are  stratified  or 
fragmental,  and  are  therefore  formed  from  the  debris  of  other  and 
earlier  rocks,  and  give  evidence  in  many  places  of  intense  heating  and 
sudden  coohng.  These  earlier  rocks  constituted  the  primitive  earth- 
crust  of  which  we  have  just  spoken. 

It  was  during  the  closing  hours  of  this  second  creative  day  that  the 
broken  and  fragmental  crust  of  the  earth  formed  another  covering  for 
the  suppressed  fires.  Mountain  ranges  made  their  appearance  and  a  new 
series  of  rocks  was  formed.  The  moistures  of  the  atmosphere  likewise 
passed  through  marvellous  chemical  changes.      Then  it  was,  as  is  shown 


AND   MODERN   SCIENCE.  15 

by  Professor  Hunt,  that  the  carbon  and  carbonates,  the  sulphur  and 
sulphates,  the  chlorides  and  waters,  representing  so  much  carbonic, 
sulphuric,  and  hydro-chloric  acids  and  aqueous  vapor,  were  extracted 
from  the  atmosphere  which  in  those  early  times  enveloped  the  earth. 
Fragmentary  rocks  were  fused  and  macadamized.  Then  also  was 
formed  the  geological  series  consisting  of  gneiss,  granite,  hornblende, 
and  the  sandstones.  In  Canada,  the  thickness  of  these  formations  or 
measures  is  forty  thousand  feet.  In  Bohemia  and  Bavaria,  the  thick- 
ness is  even  greater,  being  not  less  than  fifty  thousand  feet.  During 
these  geological  and  chemical  changes  the  atmosphere,  though  not 
perfectly  clear,  became  an  agent,  through  processes  of  evaporation,  or 
possibly  by  other  means,  in  separating  the  dense  aqueous  vapors  into  two 
masses,  one  below,  the  other  above  the  atmosphere.  It  is  estimated  that 
186,240  cubic  miles  of  rain-water  fall  annually;  enough  to  submerge 
Asia,  Africa,  Europe,  North  and  South  America  with  water  three  feet 
deep.  The  average  weight  of  water,  or,  strictly  speaking,  aqueous  vapor, 
continuously  held  in  the  air,  well-nigh  baffles  human  comprehension. 

This  immense  weight,  estimated  as  high  as  50,000,000,000,000  tons, 
did  not  originate  in  the  sky,  but  was  raised  above  the  earth's  surface  and 
suspended.  Therefore  without  violence  we  may  also,  through  rhetorical 
accommodation,  apply  to  this  period  the  language  of  Moses  : 

"And  God  said,  Let  there  be  a  firmament  in  the  midst  of  the  waters: 
and  let  it  divide  the  waters  from  the  waters.  And  God  made  the  firma- 
ment, and  divided  the  waters  which  were  under  the  firmament  from  the 
waters  which  were  above  the  firmament :  and  it  was  so.  And  God 
called  the  firmament  Heaven.  And  the  evening  an4  the  morning  were 
the  second  day." 

Of  the  length  of  this  second  day,  all  our  judgments  must  be  con- 
jectural. Le  Conte,  estimating  from  the  time  needed  to  form  a  thickness 
of  forty  or  fifty  thousand  feet  of  the  rocks  belonging  to  this  period, 
concludes  that  its  duration  is  greater  than  the  entire  subsequent  history 
of  the  earth.  If  this  is  the  case,  then,  according  to  the  conjecture  of 
Sir  William  Thomson,  the  length  of  this  volcanic  day  was  not  less  than 
one  hj^indred  million  years. 

After  another  "  cycle  of  repose,"  called  properly  a  cosmical  evening 


16  •  MOSAIC   BECOED 

and  night,  a  new  era  of  activity,  development,  and  organization  dawned 
upon  the  earth.  Geologically  it  is  easily  distinguishable  from  both  the 
preceding  and  succeeding  days.  "  The  rock  system,"  says  Le  Conte, 
speaking  of  this  epoch,  "is  distinct,  being  everywhere  unconformed 
to  the  Laurentian  below  and  to  the  Secondary  above.  It  stands  out  the 
most  distinct  era  in  the  physical  history  of  the  earth.  The  former  or 
Archcean  period  must  be  regarded  as  the  mythical  age.  Bat  here,  with 
the  Paleozoic^  commences  the  dawn  of  established  geological  history." 

During  the  morning  hours  of  this  new  day  the  Silurian  system,  some- 
times termed  the  age  of  3IoUusJcs,  was  formed.  During  its  noon  hours 
the  Devo7iia7i  system,  sometimes  termed  the  age  of  Fishes^  was  completed. 
And  during  its  afternoon  hours  the  Carboniferous  system,  sometimes 
termed  the  age  of  A^uphibians,  came  into  being  and  was  completed.  It 
was  also  during  this  period  that  the  vast  deposits  of  coal  were  formed 
and  stored.  The  atmosphere  was  warm,  humid,  uniform,  highly  car- 
bonated, stagnant,  and  stifling.  Under  such  conditions  the  growth  of 
vegetation  was  enormous  and  probably  such  as  never  again  in  this  world 
can  be  witnessed.  With  great  propriety  we  might  apply  to  this  period 
the  words  of  Moses  : 

"And  God  said.  Let  the  waters  under  the  heaven  be  gathered  together 
unto  one  place,  and  let  the  dry  land  appear  :  and  it  was  so.  And  God 
called  the  dry  land  Earth ;  and  the  gathering  together  of  the  waters 
called  he  Seas :  and  God  saw  that  it  was  good.  And  God  said,  Let  the 
earth  bring  forth  grass,  the  herb  yielding  seed,  and  the  fruit-tree  yielding 
fruit  after  his  kind,  whose  seed  is  in  itself,  upon  the  earth  :  and  it  was  so. 
And  the  earth  brought  forth  grass,  and  herb  yielding  seed  after  his  kind, 
and  the  tree  yielding  fruit,  whose  seed  was  in  itself,  after  his  kind :  and 
God  saw  that  it  was  good.  And  the  evening  and  the  morning  were  the 
third  day." 

The  duration  of  this  Silurian,  Devotiian,  and  Carboniferous  day  can 
only  be  relatively  and  approximately  conjectured.  The  estimates  of 
Bischof  and  Le  Conte  call  for  a  million  years  for  the  coal  period  alone. 
If  we  ajlow  the  same  time  for  the  two  remaining  divisions,  then  this 
third  cosmical  day  lasted  three  million  years. 


AND    MODERN   SCIENCE.  17 


III. 

COSMICAL  PERIODS  :    THE   FOURTH,  FIFTH,  ANT> 

SIXTH. 

The  Paleozoic  era  was  followed  by  another  night,  or  "  lost  interval," 
or  "  collapse  and  subsidence,"  as  modern  geologists  have  variously  de- 
nominated it.  Of  its  duration  we  know  not  much.  But  we  know  that  it 
had  an  end,  then  a  morning,  and  was  followed  by  another  era  of  activity 
and  development.  It  was  upon  this  fourth  cosmical  day  that  the  sun, 
moon,  and  stars  gave  their  light  to  the  earth.  Hitherto,  the  atmosphere 
had  been  loaded  with  vapors  and  gases,  especially  with  carbonic-acid 
gas.  The  sky  had  been  obscured,  especially  with  smoke  from  active 
volcanoes,  and  with  vapors  from  "•  the  steaming  lands  just  arisen  from 
their  watery  sepulchre."  Indeed,  up  to  the  preceding  day,  the  earth, 
being  self-luminous,  and  therefore  casting  no  shadow  behind  it,  was  so 
conditioned  as  to  render  the  succession  of  day  and  night  impossible. 

But  upon  this,  which  may  be  termed  the  first  true  solar  period,  the 
weird  light  previously  prevailing,  often  compared  by  scientists  to  the 
" zodiacal  gleam,"  the  "dying  photosphere,"  and  the  "shimmer  of  the 
aurora,"  gave  place  to  light  under  the  same  conditions  as  now  greets  the 
world  in  day-time.  There  was  a  veritable  dawn-light  and  a  veritable 
sunrise.  With  manifest  ])ropriety,  therefore,  the  words  of  Moses,  not 
literally,  but  through  rhetorical  accommodation,  may  be  applied  to  this 
geological  era : 

"And  God  said.  Let  there  be  lights  in  the  firmament  of  the  heaven,  to 
divide  the  day  from  the  night ;  and  let  them  be  for  signs,  and  for  seasons, 
and  for  days,  and  years;  and  let  them  be  for  lights  in  the  firmament  of 
the  heaven,  to  give  light  upon  the  earth:  and  it  was  so.  And  God  made 
two  great  lights;  the  greater  light  to  rule  the  day,  and  the  lesser  light  to 
rule  the  night ;  he  made  the  stars  also.  And  God  set  them  in  the  firma- 
2 


18  MOSAIC   RECORD 

ment  of  the  heaven,  to  give  light  upon  the  earth,  and  to  rule  over  the 
day  and  over  the  night,  and  to  divide  the  light  from  the  darkness  :  and 
God  saw  that  it  was  good.  And  the  evening  and  the  morning  were  the 
fourth  day." 

The  duration  of  the  cosmical  epoch,  now  under  consideration,  with 
its  succeeding  lost  interval,  was  probably  not  much  less  than  that  of  the 
preceding  day  and  night. 

The  night  of  the  solar  day  was  succeeded  by  another  formative  and 
organizing  period,  called  by  geologists  the  3Iesozoic  era  or  age  of  Reptiles. 
The  earth's  climate  was  of  high  temperature  and  quite  uniform.  Fos- 
sils of  tropical  and  sub-tropical  flora  and  fauna  belonging  to  this  era 
are  found  as  far  north  as  Spitzbergen. 

During  its  morning  hours,  which  constitute  the  Triassic  period  (con- 
suming ten  thousand  ordinary  days  and  nights),  were  formed  vast  ac- 
cumulations of  rock-salt.  During  its  noon  hours,  which  constitute 
the  long  Jurassic  period,  were  formed  fossil  and  petrified  forests.  At 
that  time  also  were  made  the  ponderous  footprints  upon  the  Connecticut 
sandstones.  During  its  afternoon  hours,  which  constitute  the  Cretaceous 
period,  were  formed  immense  deposits  of  carbonate  of  lime. 

But  the  culmination  of  reptiles  is  the  most  distinguishing  character- 
istic of  the  Mesozoic  era.  All  the  fauna,  including  birds  and  mammals, 
were  reptilian.  Professors  Dana,  Cope,  and  Le  Conte  call  attention  to  the 
fact  that  there  are  in  the  world  at  present  only  six  varieties  of  reptiles 
over  fifteen  feet  in  length.  But  in  the  Cretaceous  of  Great  Britain  alone 
there  were  not  less  than  eighteen  varieties  which  were  from  twenty  to 
sixty  feet  in  length.  In  the  United  States,  one  hundred  and  forty-seven 
fossil  species  of  reptiles  belonging  to  this  period  have  been  found,  some 
of  them  gigantic  in  size,  being  from  seventy  to  eighty  feet  in  length. 
Hence,  had  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Genesis  intended  a  description 
of  this  period,  he  could  not  have  done  much  better  than  to  say  : 

•  "  And  God  said,  Let  the  waters  bring  forth  abundantly  the  moving 
creature  that  hath  life,  and  fowl  that  may  fly  above  the  earth  in  the  open 
firmament  of  heaven.  And  God  created  great  whales,  and  every  living 
creature  that  moveth,  which  the  waters  brought  forth  abundantly,  after 
their  kind,  and  every  winged  fowl  after  his  kind  :  and  God  saw  that  it 


AND   MODERN  SCIENCE.  19 

Avas  good.  And  God  blessed  them,  saying.  Be  fruitful  and  miiltipl}", 
and  fill  the  waters  in  the  seas,  and  let  fowl  multiply  in  the  earth.  And 
the  evening  and  the  morning  were  the  fifth  day." 

The  duration  of  this  epoch,  like  that  of  the  others,  baffles  definite 
calculation.  From  one  to  three  million  years  are  the  various  and  ap- 
proximate estimates. 

The  close  of  this  period  was  a  time  of  continent  making.  The  west- 
ern half  of  America  underwent  a  "  bodily  upheaval."  The  great  Cre- 
taceous sea  which  had  hitherto  divided  North  America  was  drawn  off, 
and  one  continent  took  the  place  of  two.  The  Wahsatch  and  Uintah 
mountains  were  formed,  while  the  eastern  range  of  the  Rocky  Moun- 
tains was  greatly  elevated.  These  physical  changes  witnessed  the  devas- 
tation of  nearly  all  the  flora,  and  the  destruction  of  nearly  all  the  fauna 
which  had  hitherto  characterized  this  era. 

There  followed,  as  geologists  affirm,  another  lost  interval,  or  night, 
called  the  Permian  Laps,  from  whose  darkness  at  length  dawned  another, 
the  sixth,  cosmical  epoch.  A  new  flora  and  fauna  took  the  place  of  the 
old,  ushering  in  the  era  familiarly  known  as  the  Tertiary,  or  Cenozoic, 
which  includes  the  Eocene,  Mioee7ie,  and  Pliocene  formations.  Animals 
and  plants  such  as  had  flourished  in  no  previous  age  were  to  be  ever}- 
where  met.  It  was  emphatically  the  era  of  mammals.  Professor  Dana's 
description  vividly  portrays  the  animal  life  of  those  times : 

"  The  quadrui^etls  did  not  all  come  forth  together.  Large  ajid  powerful  herbiv- 
orous species  first  take  possession  of  the  earth,  with  only  a  few  small  carnivora. 
These  pass  away.  Other  herbivora  with  a  lai'ger  proportion  of  carnivora  next 
appear.  These  also  are  exterminated;  and  so  -with  others.  Then  the  carnivora 
ajjpear  in  vast  numbers  and  jjower,  and  the  herbivora  also  abound.  Moi-eover  these 
races  attain  a  magnitude  and  numl^er  far  surytassing  all  that  now  exist,  as  much  so 
indeed,  on  all  the  continents,  Xorth  and  South  America,  Europe,  Asia,  Africa,  and  Aus- 
tralia, as  the  old  mastodon,  twenty  feet  long  and  nine  feet  high,  exceeds  the  modern 
buH'alo.  Such,  according  to  geology,  was  the  age  of  mammals,  when  the  brute  spe- 
cies existed  in  their  greatest  magnificence,  and  brutal  ferocity  had  free  play;  when 
the  dens  of  bears  and  hyenas,  prowling  tigers  and  lions  far  larger  than  any  now  ex- 
isting, covered  Britain  and  Europe.  JVIammoths  and  mastodons  wandered  over  the 
plains  of  North  America,  huge  sloth-like  INIegatlicria  passed  tlieir  sluggish  lives  on 
tlie  pampas  of  South  America,  and  elephantine  marsuj^ials  strolled  about  Austi-alia. 
As  tlie  manmialian  age  draws  to  a  close,  the  ancient  carnivora  and  herl^ivora  of  that 


20  MOSAIC   RECORD 

era  all  pass  away,  excepting,  it  is  believed,  a  few  that  are  useful  to  man.  New  creat- 
ures of  smaller  size  peopled  the  groves;  the  vegetation  received  accessions  to  its 
foliao-e,  fruit-trees  and  flowers,  and  the  seas  brighter  forms  of  water  life.  This  we 
know  from  comparisons  with  the  fossils  of  the  preceding  mammalian  age." 

"  One  of  the  most  noteworthy  facts  connected  with  the  first  mam- 
mals," says  Le  Conte,  "is  the  apparent  suddenness  of  their  appearance 
in  great  numbers.  The  earth  seems  to  swarm  with  mammals."  The 
Eocene  basin  of  Paris,  studied  by  Cuvier ;  the  Siwalik  Hills  of  India, 
studied  by  Falconer;  the  Miocene  and  Pliocene  of.  Europe,  studied  by 
Flower  and  Lyell ;  the  Green-River  basin  of  the  United  States,  studied 
by  Marsh  and  Cope  :  the  Mauvaises  Terres  of  Nebraska,  examined  and 
described  by  Hayden  and  Leidy,  —  tell  the  same  remarkable  story  of  the 
huge  proportions  of  the  mammalia  of  the  Cenozoic  era.  There  was  the 
massive  Dmothere,  combining  in  its  structure  the  character  of  the  modern 
Elephant,  the  Hippopotamus,  the  Tapir,  and  Dugong.  There  were  also 
the  Sivathere,  a  four-horned  antelope  of  elephantine  proportions ;  the  Di- 
nocei'us^  likewise  ponderous  in  size,  armed  with  three  pairs  of  horns  and 
one  pair  of  tusks.  There  were  the  Bramathere,  the  different  varieties  of 
the  Bhinoceros,  of  the  BIppopotamus,  and  of  the  Mastodon,  the  last  variety 
reaching  its  greatest  size  somewhat  later.  The  tread  of  these  mammals 
was  almost  enough  to  make  the  hills  and  valleys  tremble.  Trees  were 
crushed  in  their  pathway.^  Job's  description  of  the  Behemoth  may  well 
be  applied  to  this  race  of  giant  animals  : 

"  Behold  now  behemoth  ;  he  eateth  grass  as  an  ox.  He  moveth  his 
tail  like  a  cedar.  His  bones  are  as  strong  pieces  of  brass  ;  his  bones  are 
like  bars  of  iron.  Surely  the  mountains  bring  him  forth  food,  where  all 
the  beasts  of  the  field  play.  He  lieth  under  the  shady  trees,  in  the 
covert  of  the  reed,  and  fens.  The  shady  trees  cover  him  with  their 
shadow  ;  the  willows  of  the  brook  compass  him  about.  Behold,  he 
drinketh  up  a  river,  and  hasteth  not :  he  trusteth  that  he  can  draw  up 
Jordan  into  his  mouth.  He*taketh  it  with  his  eyes :  his  nose  pierceth 
through  snares." 

The  suddenness  of  the  appearance  of  this  race  of  mammals  both  in 
Europe,  where  the  uniformity  of  strata  is  clearly  indicative  of  "  a  lost 
interval,"   and  in  the  Rocky   Mountain  region  of  America,  where    the 


AND    MODERN   SCIENCE.  21 

interval  between  the  Cretaceous  and  the  Tertiary  is  far  less  marked,  also 
the  wide  difference  between  this  fauna  and  that  found  in  the  preceding 
era  —  perplexingly  marvellous  facts  in  any  atheistic  theory  of  evolution 
—  allow  us,  as  in  the  other  instances,  to  accommodate  the  language  of 
Moses  to  this  epoch  : 

"And  God  said,  Let  the  earth  bring  forth  the  living  creature  after 
his  kind,  cattle,  and  creei)ing  thing,  and  beast  of  the  earth  after  his 
kind :  and  it  was  so.  And  God  made  the  beast  of  the  earth  after  his 
kind,  and  cattle  after  their  kind,  and  every  thing  that  creepeth  upon  the 
earth  after  his  kind  :  and  God  saw  that  it  was  good." 

It  may  be  remarked  in  this  connection  that  up  to  the  early  part 
of  the  period  under  consideration,  there  is  no  evidence  that  man,  either 
prophetic  or  Adamic,  anywhere  existed.  As  to  the  date  of  his  origin, 
three  sciences.  History,  Archaeology,  and  Geology,  must  be  allowed  to 
co-operate  in  furnishing  information.  Canon  Rawlinson  has  clearly 
shown  the  remarkable  convergence  of  all  reliable  historic  and  archceologic 
dates,  outside  of  the  Bible,  towards  a  time  not  earlier  than  three  thou- 
sand, nor  later  than  two  thousand  j^ears  B.  c.  Scripture  histor}'  goes 
further,  carrying  us  back  to  antediluvian  man.  Geological  history  has  no 
firmly  established  data,  though  as  to  certain  points  there  is  quite  general 
agreement.  Says  Le  Conte :  '■'-The  Miocene  man  is  not  acknowledged 
by  a  single  careful  geologist."  Both  M.  Favre,  reviewing  the  subject 
up  to  1870,  and  Professor  Evans,  President  of  the  Geological  Society 
of  London,  thoroughly  examining  the  subject  in  1875,  decided  that  the 
existence  of  Tertiary  man  was  unproved.  Careful  examinations  of  later 
foi'mations  have  been  made  throughout  Europe,  in  the  United  States, 
and  in  some  parts  of  India.  As  a  result,  we  are  told  by  an  eminent 
authority,  that  "  there  is  no  reliable  evidence  yet  of  man's  existence 
before  or  even  during  the  true  Grlacial  or  ice-sheeted  epoch."  In  the 
later  Terrace  period  there  are  human  remains.  It  is  not  clear,  however, 
that  they  at  all  antedate  the  Asiatic  d.escendants  of  Adam.  Still,  it 
need  not  be  s.urprising,  should  it  hereafter  be  established  that  there  are 
remains  of  beings  who  in  merely  physical  or  physiological  structure 
resemble  existing  man.  The  great  law  of  geological  or  creative  proph- 
ecy would  almost  seem  to  demand  an  order  of  animal  life  a  little  more 
clearly  typical  of  the  Adamic  race  than  has  yet  been  discovered.'^ 


Z'J,  MOSAIC   RECORD 

It  should  be  noted  still  further,  that  the  uncertainties  of  geological 
chronology  have  been  of  late  not  a  little  increased  by  certain  discoveries 
of  Dr.  Wyville  Thomson,  Dr.  Carpenter,  and  others,  of  creatures  now 
living  in  the  deep  seas,  which  geologists,  if  they  had  found  them  as 
fossils,  would  unhesitatingly  have  ascribed  to  a  verj^  early  epoch. 

Professor  Winchell,  in  Sketches  of  Creation,  speaking  of  the  antiquity 
of  m[in,  is  emphatic.     He  says : 

"  There  is  more  in  the  history  of  immeval  man  that  confirms  om-  Scriptures  than 
there  is  of  conliict  with  them.  Man  has  no  place  till  after  the  reign  of  ice. 
But  it  has  been  imagined  that  the  close  of  the  reign  of  ice  dates  back  perliaps  a  hun- 
dred thousand  years.  There  is  no  evidence  of  this.  The  cone  of  drift  materials 
accumulated  at  the  mouth  of  the  Tiniere,  in  which  have  been  found  human  remains, 
was  estimated  by  Morlot  to  be  from  ninety-six  to  one  hundred  and  forty-three  thou- 
sand years  old;  but  Dr.  Andrews  has  exposed  a  curious  arithmetical  blunder,  the 
correction  of  which  reduces  the  time  to  within  five  thousand  years.  We  have  no  rule 
for  the  measurement  of  jiost-tertiary  time  which  necessitates  the  admission  of  so  high 
antiquity  to  our  race.  If  we  have  been  accustomed  to  think  of  the  extinction  of  the 
cave-bear  as  dating  back  to  higli  antiquity,  we  now  discover  that  he  lived  with  man, 
and  the  reindeer,  and  other  animals  which  still  survive.  The  existence  of  even  the 
cave-bear  may  not  have  been  so  very  remote.  What  are  the  reasons  assigned  for  the 
prevalent  oj^nion  that  it  was  many  ages  ago  that  the  glaciers  began  to  disaj^pear 
from  Euroiie?  Shni^ly  the  existence  at  that  time  of  quadrupeds  now  extinct,  together 
with  the  presumption,  unsupported,  as  it  seems,  by  the  facts,  that  no  animals  have 
coexisted  with  man  except  those  of  the  recent  fiiuna.  The  foct  is,  that  we  come 
ourselves  ui^on  the  earth  in  time  to  witness  the  retreat  of  the  glaciers.  They  still 
linger  in  the  valleys  of  the  Alps,  and  along  the  northern  shores  of  Europe  and  Asia, 
wliile  the  disapj^earance  of  animals  once  contemporaries  of  man  is  still  continuing. 
Not  only  did  contemporaries  of  man  become  extinct  during  the  age  of  stone;  some 
survived  to  the  twelfth,  fourteenth,  and  sixteenth  centuries,  as  already  stated;  the 
]\Ioa  of  jSTew  Zealand,  and  the  yEpiornis  of  IMadagascar,  have  become  extinct  within 
the  epoch  of  tradition,  aS  indeed  has  the  Mammoth  of  North  America;  the  Dodo  of 
Mauritius  disappeared  in  the  seventeenth  century;  the  Great  Auk  of  the  arctic 
regions  has  not  been  seen  for  half  a  century ;  and  every  one  must  be  convinced  that 
the  beaver,  elk,  panther,  buffalo,  and  other  quadrupeds  of  North  America  are  ap- 
pi'oaeliing  extinction  by  perceptible  steps.  The  fact  is,  we  are  not  so  far  out  of 
the  dust,  and  chaos,  and  barbarism  of  antiquity  as  we  had  supposed.  Tlie  very 
beginnings  of  our  race  are  still  almost  in  sight.  Geological  events  which,  from  the 
force  of  habit  in  considering  geological  events,  we  had  imagined  to  be  located  far 
back  in  tlie  history  of  tilings,  are  found  to  have  transpired  at  our  very  doors.  Our 
own  race  has  witnessed  the  dissolution  of  those  continental  srlaciers  which  we  have 


AND   MODERN   SCIENCE.  23 

SO  long  talked  of  as  incidents  of  pre-Adamic  history.  Oiu*  own  race  has  witnessed 
the  submergence  of  Soutliern  Europe;  the  detachment  of  the  British  Islands  and 
Scandinavia  from  the  continent;  the  wanderings  of  tlie  great  rivers  of  Eastern 
Asia ;  the  submergence  of  thousands  of  square  miles  of  the  coast  of  China,  so  that 
the  seats  of  ancient  capitals  are  now  rocky  islets  far  at  sea.  The  emergence  of  the 
ancient  country  of  Lectonia ;  the  drainage  of  the  vast  lake  which  once  overspread 
the  prairies  of  Illinois ;  the  alternations  of  forests,  and  many  other  events  which  we 
once  associated  with  high  antiquity.  It  is  the  opinion  of  Hooker  and  Gray  that  the 
Falkland  Islands,  and  others  in  the  vicinity,  have  formed  a  part  of  the  continent  of 
South  America  during  recent  times,  and  that  during  this  connection  they  acquired 
the  continental  fauna  and  flora.  The  Straits  of  Behring  may  even  have  been  cut 
through  since  the  early  migrations  of  man  oind  his  contemporaries,  the  mammoth  and 
reindeer;  as  in  some  distant  future  age  the  Isthmus  of  Darien,  which  now  connects 
North  and  South  America,  may  become  a  strait  separating  them.  There  is  no  more 
reason  in  this  day  than  fifty  years  ago  to  claim  a  hundred  thousand  years  for  the  past 
dui'ation  of  our  race."  8 

Returning  to  the  characteristics  of  the  Cenozoic  day,  and  allowing 
its  later  periods  to  include  the  earlier  part  of  the  Quaternary  era,  we 
find  it  remarkable  in  many  respects  not  yet  mentioned.  There  were 
late  in  the  day  immense  oscillations  of  the  earth's  surface,  resulting  in,  or 
accompanied  by,  conditions  that  were  extremely  destructive.  Northern 
Europe  and  Canada  rose  more  than  a  thousand  feet  above  their  present 
level.  The  temperature  fell  greatly  below  its  former  average.  The 
polar  ice-sheet  crept  southwai'd  in  North  America  until  it  covered  Sierra 
Nevada,  reaching  even  to  southern  California.  The  Yosemite  Valley 
and  the  Lake  Tahoe  region  were  filled  with  glacial  ice.  Over  the 
Middle  and  Eastern  States  this  polar  ice-sheet  extended  to  the  fortieth 
degree.  The  Archceayi  region  of  Canada  was  covered  with  an  ice-mantle 
from  three  to  six  thousand  feet  thick.  So  likewise  the  British  Isles,  the 
whole  of  Scandinavia,  Switzerland,  and  all  northwestern  Europe  and 
Asia,  were  under  fields  of  ice,  which  at  the  culmination  of  the  G-lacial 
period  extended  as  far  south  as  tlie  fiftieth  degree.  Animals  belonging 
to  the  northern  latitudes  perished  or  were  forced  to  retreat  southward. 
They  entered  all  availal)lc  caves  and  caverns.  It  was  then,  as  is  sup- 
posed by  some  scientists,  that  much  of  the  cave  bone-rubbish  w^as  accu- 
mulated. The  picture  drawn  by  Le  Conte  is  doubtless  true  of  what  then 
took  place.      "  Animals  of  all  sizes  and  kinds,"  he  says,  "  are  supposed 


24  MOSAIC  RECORD 

to  have  huddled  together  iii  those  caves,  forgetting  their  mutual  hos- 
tility in  the  sense  of  a  common  danger  and  perished  miserably  together 
there." 

Later  in  the  day  came  the  Cliamijlain  period,  during  which  the  land 
surfaces  sunk  until  the  sea  stood  from  five  hundred  to  a  thousand  feet 
above  its  present  level.^  The  climate  moderated,  the  ice  rapidly  melted, 
and  the  waters  of  lakes  and  seas  were  filled  with  icebergs,  which  dis- 
charged their  cargoes  of  gravel  and  boulders  over  lands  widely  sep- 
arated. 

These  changes,  though  not  in  every  instance  sudden,  were  neverthe- 
less attended  with  sweeping  devastations  and  death.  The  world  is  not 
improperly  represented  during  the  close  of  this  era  as  a  vast  and  almost, 
though  not  quite,  silent  grave-yard.  The  most  recent  investigations 
show  that  some  varieties  of  life  seem  to  have  struggled  on  into  the  later 
or  established  human  period.^" 

The  length  of  time  thus  far  consumed  is  bewildering  —  in  all,  per- 
haps, a  thousand  million  years.  Such  are  the  six  work-days  of  the 
cosmical  and  prophetic  week  of  creation.  That  there  is  general  agree- 
ment among  scientists,  as  to  these  six  eras,  there  can  be  no  question. 
Indeed,  refer  to  any  modern  treatise  upon  geology,  and  the  coincidence 
is  at  once  noticeable.  For  illustration  :  We  have  in  Professor  Maiish's 
classification,  first,  the  Planetic  era;  second,  the  Archceic ;  third,  the 
Paleozoic;  fourth,  the  Mesozoic ;  fifth,  the  Cetiozoic ;  and  sixth,  the  Ps?/- 
chozoic.  In  Le  Conte's  classification  there  are,  first,  the  Eozoic ;  second, 
the  age  of  Invertebrates;  third,  the  age  oi  Fishes ;  fourth,  the  age  of 
Acrogens  ;  fifth,  the  age  of  Reptiles ;  and  sixth,  the  age  of  Mammals. 
The  classification  of  Professor  Dana,  except  the  terms  employed,  is 
identical  with  the  foregoing:  First,  Azoic  age  ;  second,  age  of  Molluslcs ; 
third,  age  of  Fishes ;  fourth,  age  of  Coal ;  fifth,  age  of  Reptiles ;  and 
sixth,  age  of  Mammals.  These  six  periods  and  the  six  days  of  Moses, 
it  will  be  noticed,  show  a  remarkable  ap:reement. 

Thus  the  case  stands  at  the  present  stage  of  scientific  investigation. 
What  the  next  ten  years  may  bring  to  light  through  geological  researches, 
we  do  not  know.^^ 

Now  bear  in  mind  that  it  is  this  striking  and  wonderful  correspond- 


AND   MODEKN    SCIENCE.  25 

ence  between  the  Bible  account  and  modern  science,  which  has  led  such 
Professors  as  Guyot,  Hitchcock,  Dana,  and  such  men  of  science  as  Hugh 
Miller,' Humboldt,  and  Chancellor  Dawson,  and  such  Biblical  students  as 
Professor  Schaff,  Lange,  and  President  McCosh,  to  say  that  Moses  either 
must  have  known  the  general  facts  of  modern  geological  science,  or  else 
have  been  inspired  to  make  the  record  in  Genesis.  And  more  than  this, 
they  think  that  Moses  must  have  meant  by  the  term  "  day,"  one  of  these 
six  vast  periods  into  which  geological  history  is  so  manifestly  divided. 
Indeed,  were  it  not  for  the  word  "day,"  with  its  "evening  and  morning," 
and  were  it  not  for  the  opinions  of  eminent  Hebrew  scholars,  without 
taking  an  additional  step,  we  might  be  satisfied  to  rest  the  argument 
upon  this  unmistakable  and  remarkable  agreement  of  Bible  statements 
with  the  disclosures  of  modern  science.  But,  as  the  case  stands,  we 
cannot,  and  therefore  venture  to  take  the  additional  step. 


26  MOSAIC   EECORD 


IV. 
THE   LAW   OF   TYPE   A^D   ANTITYPE. 

AccoEDiNG  to  the  theory  as  already  outlined,  it  was  after  those  vast 
cosmical  periods  had  passed,  after  the  Chaniplain  suhmergence  and  the 
JJinft  ice-flow  had  wrecked  the  earth's  surface,  and  just  prior  to  the 
Human  period,  that  the  Creator,  in  six  ordinary  days,  accomplished  the 
work  which  is  definitely  recorded  in  the  book  of  Genesis.  The  theory 
also  involves  the  claim  that  these  ordinary  days  were  anticipated,  or 
were  typified  by  the  six  scientific,  or  cosmical  days  of  the  original 
creation. 

There  is  certainly  a  strong  antecedent  probability  in  support  of  this 
view,  in  the  fact  that  there  is  a  prophetic  or  typical  principle  found 
everywhere  in  the  universe.  One  dispensation  as  a  forerunner  of 
another,  is  a  universal  order  or  arrangement  in  the  nature  of  thino-s. 
Childhood  is  a  prophecy,  manhood  its  falfihuent.  The  Jewish  theocracy 
was  a  type,  Christianity  the  realization. 

Or,  confining  attention  to  the  field  of  j)ure  physics,  we  shall  discover 
that  the  fins  of  fishes,  and  the  wings  and  the  feet  of  birds,  and  the  fore 
and  hind  feet  of  brutes,  created  before  man,  are  typical  or  prophetic  of 
the  arms  and  feet  of  man.  George  Mivart  makes  the  following  state- 
ment of  this  subject : 

"  Thus  man,  the  horse,  the  whale,  and  the  bat,  all  have  the  pectoral  limb,  —  whether 
it  be  the  arm,  or  fore-leg,  or  paddle,  or  wing,  —  formed  on  essentially  the  same  tyjje, 
though  the  number  and  ijroportion  of  the  parts  may  more  or  less  differ.  Again,  the 
butterlly,  and  the  shrimp,  different  as  tliey  are  in  appearance  and  mode  of  life,  are 
yet  constructed  on  the  same  common  plan,  of  which  they  constitute  divergent  mani- 
festations." 

Man,  as  Professor  Owen  expresses  the  same  thought,  has  had  all  his 
parts  and  organs  "sketched  out  in  anticipation  in  the  inferior  animals." 


AND   MODERN    SCIENCE.  27 

Says  Professor  Agassiz,  speaking  of  animal  types  :  "  They  appear  now- 
like  a  prophecy  in  those  earlier  times  of  an  order  of  things  not  possible 
with  the  earlier  combinations  then  prevailing  in  tlie  animal  kingdom, 
but  exhibiting  in  a  later  period,  in  a  striking  manner,  the  antecedent 
consideration  of  every  stage  in  the  gradation  of  animals." 

The  lower  forms  of  animal  life  are  not  therefore  necessarily  those 
from  which  later  forms  were  develojyed,  but  apparently  are  those  which 
prophesied  the  coming  of  those  forms  which  God  was  to  create  when 
suitable  conditions  had  been  reached.  Thus,  likewise,  prehistoric  human 
remains,  should  they  be  discovered,  might  be  those  of  irrational  creat- 
ures, not  from  which  rational  man  has  been  developed,  but  which  are 
simply  a  type,  in  accorcfance  with  which  God  designed  to  make  rational 
and  existing  man  when  the  ordained  period  had  arrived. 

Professor  Agassiz  carries  this  general  thought  a  step  further,  showing 
that  types  and  prophecies  are  even  found  in  minerals.  He  asserts  that 
''  the  crystal  imbedded  in  the  rock,  by  the  little  fibres  and  threads  that 
go  out  from  it,  anticipates  the  coming  vegetable."  "  And  vegetation," 
says  Chancellor  Haven,  "  when  it  reaches  perfection  pre-typifies  the 
coming  animal,  and  the  animal  in  its  instincts  pre-typifies  the  coming 
reason  of  the  man." 

"The  swan  on  still  INIary's  lake 
Floats  double,  swan  and  shadow." 

It  is  the  discovery  of  the  presence  throughout  physical  nature  of  this 
typical  or  prophetic  principle,  sometimes  termed  the  law  of  "  springing 
and  gerniinant  accomplishment,"  which  leads  to  an  antecedent  prol)a- 
bility  that  there  will  be  found  for  ever}^  type  in  the  work  or  method  of 
creation  an  antitype.  Indeed,  it  should  occasion  great  surprise,  if  upon 
thorough  investigation  it  should  be  found  that  the  Creative  Power, 
in  fitting  the  nniverse  for  habitation,  has  departed  from  this  law  of 
type  and  antitype,  or  of  creative  prophecy  and  fulfilment.  Hence, 
if  the  IMosaic  account  of  creation  describes  cosmical  days,  then  the 
scientific  mind  ought  confidently  to  look  for  a  corresponding  work 
embraced   in   six  ordinary  da^'s.      Or,  if  the   Mosaic  account  describes 


28  MOSAIC   RECORD 

ordinary  days,  then  we  ought,  upon  strictly  analogical  and  scientific 
grounds,  just  as  confidently  to  exjDect  a  prophetic  work  embraced  in 
six  cosraical  or  geological  periods.  Prophecy  and  fulfilment  in  creation 
there  ought  to  be,  in  which  a  thousand  years  are  as  one  day,  and  one 
day  as  a  thousand  years.-'^ 


AND    MODERN   SCIENCE.  29 


V.  i 

CHAOS    AKD   THE   MOSAIC   DAYS. 

Before  advancing,  it  is  well  to  observe  that  we  do  not  claim  that 
Moses  was  not  permitted  or  inspired  as  well  to  see  what  transpired  in 
the  vast  cosmical  or  primitive  creative  periods,  as  in  the  six  solar  days. 
He  may  or  he  may  not  have  seen  those  early  parallel  developments.  But 
if  he  saw  both  the  type  and  the  antitj^pe,  and  if  he  wrote  of  both, 
then  his  whole  account  of  the  original  creative  periods,  or  the  type,  is 
included  in  the  first  verse  of  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis.  For  upon 
exegetical  grounds,  as  already  shown,  we  must  insist  that  verses  two 
and  twenty-eight  inclusive,  of  the  first  chapter,  and  verses  one  and 
three,  and  five  and  seven  inclusive,  of  the  second  chapter,  refer  to  six 
ordinary  days,  wdiich  had  been  typified  by  the  earlier  and  undescribed 
cosmical  days  or  periods. 

In  a  word,  as  Torn  (day),  though  sometimes  used  to  denote  an 
indefinite  period,  as  in  verse  four,  chapter  second,  is  never  so  used  when 
limited  by  the  words,  a-j-av  (evening),  and  Ja-Zrar  (morning),  it  follows, 
that  in  harmonizing  the  Mosaic  account  and  modern  science,  we  are, 
after  passing  from  the  first  verse  of  chapter  first,  to  limit  attention 
primarily,  and  indeed  exclusively,  to  six  solar  days  ;  and  we  are  to 
consider  all  the  early  and  distinctive  geological  formations  as  merely 
evidences  of  parallel,  or  typical  and  prophetic  epochs. 

Hence,  under  the  light  of  a  very  well-established  exegesis,  aided  by 
various  acknowledged  data  which  certainl}^  support  our  working  hy- 
pothesis, we  cannot  fail  of  discerning  that  those  remarkable  words,  "  In 
the  beginning  God  created  the  heavens  and  the  earth,"  cover  the  entire 
past  of  the  present  administration  of  the  physical  universe.  The  start- 
ing-point of  the  peiiod  designated  by  Moses  is  not,  therefore,  limited,  as 
is  sometimes  talked,  to  six  thousand,  nor  sixty  thousand,  nor  six  hundred 
thousand  years.      The  words  employed  merely  tell  us  that  the  silence  of 


30  MOSAIC   EECORD 

a  section  of  eternity  was  broken,  and  that  something  appeared  which 
at  least,  was  not  previously  visible.  The  only  restriction  placed  upon 
science  at  this  point  by  the  Mosaic  account,  is,  that  the  evolution  and 
development  of  the  material  universe,  with  which  our  world  is  con- 
nected, had  a  beginning  under   the  direction  of  a  power  called  God.^^ 

In  this  connection,  the  mind  of  the  reflective  student  is  at  once 
engaged  with  the  thought,  that  the  condition  of  darkness  and  emptiness 
which  preceded  the  original  creation  of  light  upon  the  first  cosmical  or 
astronomical  epoch,  harmonizes  with  what  must  have  been  the  condition 
of  the  eaith  after  the  true  glacial,  and  during  the  turbulent  drift  period. 
During  that  epoch  of  melting  ice  and  of  floating  icebergs,  much  of  the 
earth  now  inhabited  was  under  the  sea.  There  were  howling  winds,  and 
among  the  mountains  there  were  grinding  and  crushing  icebergs,  and 
the  sk}'  was  everywhere  heavily  inswathed  with  dense  banks  of  vapor, 
fog,  and  clouds.  Conditions  similar  to  those  which  now  produce  the 
dense  fogs  of  London,  and  the  well-nigh  perpetual  fogs  along  the  north- 
eastern coast  of  North  America,  existed  round  the  entire  earth,  and 
nearly  from  one  pole  to  the  other.  Thus,  in  this  darkness,  and  in  this 
wreck  of  the  earth's  surface,  was  a  blank,  as  already  intimated,  that 
corresponded  with  the  blank  whicb  science  declares  preceded  the  origi- 
nal creation  of  light. 

Turning  now  to  the  Mosaic  account,  and  following  a  strictly  literal 
translation,  we  read  these  words :_  "  In  the  beginning  created  God  the 
heavens  and  the  earth.  Then  the  earth  became  a  roaring  flood  and  void, 
and  darkness  was  upon  the  face  of  the  billows." 

Eead,  if  you  please,  any  scientific  work  upon  the  Drift  period,, 
whether  from  the  pen  of  a  believer  in  the  Bible,  or  an  unbeliever,  it 
matters  not,  and  the  agreement  between  it  and  the  Bible  account  will 
be  found  exact.  That  is,  both  science  and  the  Bible  afSrm  that  after 
the  earth  had  been  created,  after  it  had  existed  a  countless  number  of 
ages,  during  which  it  had  been  governed  by  natural  laws,  much  as  it  is 
now  governed,  after  it  had  met  with  change  and  vicissitude,  had  laid  up 
in  storehouses  the  geological  deposits  of  granite  and  clay,  of  coal  and  oil, 
of  salt  and  lime,  of  silver  and  gold,  then  it  became  a  waste.  In  the 
zone  where  man  first  appeared,  scarcely  a  living  thing  moved  on  its  sur- 
face, or  burrowed  in  its  soil. 


AisD   MODERN  SCIENCE.  .  31 


VI. 

MOSAIC    DAYS  :     THE    FIRST,    SECOND,    AXD 

THIRD. 

A  moment's  reflection  at  this  point  will  convince  any  person  that 
all  the  sciences  unite  in  a  declaration,  that,  in  order  to  render  the  earth 
inhabitable,  the  ice-line  must  retreat  north,  and  the  thick  mantling  of 
vapors  and  fogs — a  mantling  so  dense  as  to  render  day  impossible  and 
night  perpetual  —  must  lose  somewhat  of  its  density,  so  that  the  light 
could  at  least  struggle  through  the  darkness,  enabling  one,  if  upon  the 
earth's  surface,  to  distinguish  day  from  night.  This,  we  repeat,  is  what 
must  first  take  place  in  order  to  render  the  earth  inhabitable.  No  scientist 
would  be  disposed  to  or  could  dispute  this  statement.  But  how  could 
such  changes  be  brought  about,  must  have  been  at  that  time  a  perplex- 
ing question.  The  Bible  account  answers  the  question  thus  :  "  Then 
the  Spirit  of  God  was  brooding  upon  the  face  of  the  waters.  Then  said 
God,  Light  be ;  and  light  was.  Then  God  saw  the  light  that  it  was 
good ;  then  God  divided  between  the  light  and  between  the  darkness. 
Then  God  called  the  light  day,  and  the  darkness  he  called  night.  Then 
was  evening,  then  was  morning  ;  day  one."  Thus  fur,  Bible  statement 
and  scientific  fact  perfectly  harmonize. 

This  change  to  comparative  daylight  from  a  blackness  denser  than 
that  of  a  Newfoundland  midnight,  could  by  Creative  Power  have  been 
effected,  it  must  be  allowed,  without  doing  any  violence  to  modern  sci- 
ence, in  a  day  of  twelve  hours  duration.  Certain  meteorological  or  elec- 
trical changes  were  all  that  was  necessary. 

The  type  of  this  day's  work  is  found  evidently  in  the  primitive 
creative  period,  when  the  flames  of  nebulous  gases  flashed  out  from  the 
original  chaotic  darkness. 

The  next  change,  according  to  science,  which  was  necessary  in  order  to 
render  the  earth  inhabitable,  was  such  as  to  clear  up  the  banks  of  fogs 


32  MOSAIC   EECOED 

that  still  clung  to  its  surface.  They  must  be  lifted  to  the  higher  regions 
of  the  sky  through  some  agency  —  perhaps,  by  the  introduction  of  new 
elements  into  the  atmosphere  —  so  that  between  the  waters  of  the  earth 
and  the  dense  moistures  which  had  been  held  in  the  atmosphere,  there 
would  be  a  breathing-space  of  pure  and  pellucid  air,  for  upon  this 
depended  the  possibility  of  thrifty  and  healthful  vegetable  and  animal 
life.  Something  like  this  is  witnessed  in  the  breaking  up  after  a  storm. 
The  fogs  rise,  concealing  the  sun,  even  after  the  atmosphere  upon  the 
earth's  surface,  as,  far  as  the  eye  can  reach',  is  clear.  But  how,  it  may 
well  be  asked,  could  these  very  desirable  and  necessary  changes  be 
accomplished?  The  Bible  account  again  answers:  "Then  said  God, 
Let  an  expanse  be  in  the  midst  of  the  waters;  and  let  a  dividing  be 
between  the  waters  to  the  waters.  Then  God  formed  the  expanse,  and 
divided  between  the  water  which  was  above  the  expanse  and  between 
the  water  which  was  beneath  the  expanse :  and  it  was  so.  Then  God 
called  the  expanse  heaven.  Then  was  evening,  then  was  morning  ;  day 
second."  1"^  These  changes,  upon  strictly  scientific  grounds,  required  for 
their  accomplishment  no  more  than  a  single  day  of  twelve  hours  dura- 
tion. Thus  again,  Bible  statement  and  scientific  fact  are  found  to  be  in 
such  exact  agreement,  that  no  man  caring  for  his  reputation  would  ven- 
ture to  divorce  them.  Furthermore,  the  cosmical  type,  of  which  this  sec- 
ond ordinary  day  is  the  antitype,  is  manifestly  found  in  that  early  epoch 
before  organic  life  and  dry  land  had  appeared,  and  when  by  slow  processes 
the  atmosphere  was  elaborated  from  the  primeval  waters  and  vapors. 

Thus  far,  upon  scientific  grounds,  we  have  shown,  what,  from  the 
nature  of  the  case,  must  have  been  the  process  and  order  of  the  earth's 
renewal.  From  this  point  onward  we  can  follow  definitely  the  geologic 
records.  That  is,  we  know  that  the  world  was  deluged  during  the  Drift 
period.  North  America  was  two  or  three  thousand  feet  under  water.  In 
a  similar  condition  were  all  countries  which  have  been  geologically  exam- 
ined. Therefore,  before  there  can  be  further  advance  in  preparing  the 
earth  for  habitation,  the  waters  which  still  concealed  its  surface  must  by 
some  agency  be  removed. 

There  are  two  ways  which  at  that  time  were  scientifically  possible : 
First,  a  change  in  the  atmosphere,  which,  without  destroying  its  trans- 


AND   MODERN    SCIENCE.  33 

parencj',  would  render  it  a  greater  absorbent  of  water ;  and  second, 
some  change  in  the  ocean  of  waters  which  would  enable  them  to  under- 
go greater  condensation.  By  either  method,  or  by  both  combined,  the 
required  changes  could  be  easily,  quietly,  and  quickly  accomplished,  and 
the  words  of  the  Psalmist  would  be  accurately  descriptive : 

"  Tliou  cCveredst  it  with  the  deep  as  with  a  garment :  the  waters 
stood  above  the  mountains.  At  thy  rebuke  they  fled  ;  at  the  voice  of 
thy  thunder  they  hasted  away.  They  go  up  by  the  mountains;  they  go 
down  by  the  valleys  unto  the  place  which  thou  hast  founded  for  them. 
Thou  hast  set  a  bound  that  they  may  not  pass  over  ;  that  they  turn  not 
again  to  cover  the  earth."  ^^ 

These  surface  changes  of  the  earth  described  by  Moses,  it  will  be 
noticed,  find  their  type  or  prophecy  in  that  cosmical  epoch  when  a 
world  of  rocky  peaks,  active  volcanoes,  lava  currents,  vast  mud  flats, 
with  nowhere  "•  a  blade  of  grass  or  a  clinging  lichen,"  were  upheaved 
from  their  watery  sepulchre. 

Upon  this  second  solar  day,  after  the  retiring  of  the  waters,  the 
earth  was  in  readiness  for  an  order  of  vegetation  hitherto  unknown.  But 
whence  could  it  come  ?  Various  agencies  had  been  at  work  to  devas- 
tate the  flora  of  the  old  geological  periods.  The  Glacial  and  Drift  eras, 
for  instance,  had  made  with  it  sad  havoc.  Were  the  conditions  which 
characterize  the  Glacial  and  Drift  eras  reproduced  in  our  day,  we  do 
not  see  how  an}'  existing  flora  could  survive.  Aside  from  those  atmos- 
pheric changes  there  had  also  been  geographical  elevations  and  sub- 
sidences, which  are  thought  to  have  been  of  sufhcient  magnitude  to 
wreck  every  remaining  plant  and  tree  which  had  flourished  during  the 
geological  ages.     Saj's  Dr.  Lardner  : 

"The  disruption  of  the  eartli's  crust,  extending  W.  16°  S.,  and  E.1G°  N.,  through 
which  the  chain  of  the  great  Alps  was  forced  up  to  its  present  elevation,  which, 
according  to  M.  D'Orbigny,  was  simultaneous  with  that  which  forced  up  the  Chilian 
Andes,  —  a  chain  which  extends  over  a  length  of  three  thousand  miles  of  the  western 
continent,  —  terminated  the  Tertiary  age,  and  precedcnl  immediately  the  creation  of 
the  human  race  and  its  concomitant  tribes.  The  waters  of  the  seas  and  oceans,  lifted 
up  from  their  beds  by  this  immense  perturbation,  swept  over  the  continents  with 
irresistible  force,  destroying  instantaneously  the  entire  Hora  and  fauna  of  the  last 
Tertiary  period,  and  burying  its  ruins  in  the  sedimentary  dejiosits  Avhich  ensued."  '® 

3 


34  MOSAIC   RECORD 

Whence,  therefore,  could  come  the  existing  grasses,  plants,  and  trees? 
They  differ,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  from  those  that  had  previously  existed. 
Furthermore,  that  early  vegetation,  as  just  hinted,  appears  to  have  been 
laro-ely  devastated.  Since  the  Drift  period  there  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  time  sufficient,  by  the  processes  of  development,  to  produce 
the  existing  flora,  and  there  is  as  yet  no  positive  evidence  that  decidedly 
distinct  and  established  species  have  ever  been  developed  from  previ- 
ously existing  species.^"  Whence,  then,  we  repeat,  came  the  grasses, 
and  the  herbs,  and  the  fruit-bearing  trees  belonging  to  the  present 
Human  period  ?  From  some  source  they  must  have  come.  There  could 
have  been  no  oak  without  an  acorn  ;  there  could  have  been  no  acorn 
without  an  oak.  Whence  the  first  oak,  or  the  first  acorn,  for  the 
modern  oak  and  acorn  are  not  found  the  other  side  of  the  Drift  epoch  ? 
Whence  did  they  come,  and  what  power  was  it  that  fitted  the  deluged 
earth  for  their  reception,  are  legitimate  questions.  Again,  the  Bible 
account  answers  the  perplexing  inquiries : 

"  Then  said  God,  Gathered  be  the  waters  from  under  the  skies  into 
one  place,  and  let  the  ground  appear :  and  it  was  so.  Then  God  called 
the  ground  land,  and  the  gathered  waters  he  called  seas ;  then  God 
saw  it  was  good.  Then  said  God,  Grow  the  land  grass,  herb  yielding 
seed,  fruit  tree  bearing  fruit  after  its  kind  in  which  is  its  seed,  upon 
the  land:  and  it  was  so.  Then  brought  the  land  forth  grass,  herb 
yielding  seed  after  its  kind,  and  tree  bearing  fruit,  in  which  was  its 
seed  after  its  kind  :  then  was  evening,  then  was  morning  ;  day  third." 
And  a  day  having  a  morning  and  an  evening  of  twelve  hours  duration, 
was  all  that  was  needed. 

The  type  of  which  this  Mosaic  day  is  the  antitype  is  found  in  the 
Carboniferous  period,  when  the  lower  forms  of  vegetation  flourished  as 
never  before  nor  since. 


AND   MODERN   SCIENCE.  35 


VII. 

MOSAIC  DAYS  :    THE  FOURTH,   FIFTH,  A^D 

SIXTH. 

Fixing  attention  again  upon  the  Mosaic  account  of  the  world's 
evolution  and  preparation,  we  ask,  what,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
must  have  been  done  next,  in  order  to  grow  this  created  vegetation,  and  fit 
the  earth  for  animal  life?  Upon  a  cloudy  day  the  plants  and  trees  were 
created',  but  without  the  clear  sunlight  of  after-days  the}^  would  sicken 
and  die.  Hence,  it  was  necessary  that  the  clouds  which  had  hitherto 
concealed  the  sun  and  stars,  should  be  removed.  There  had  been,  since 
the  beginning  of  the  Drift  period,  daylight,  but  no  direct  sunlight.  The 
sun,  moon,  and  stars  must  therefore  next  appear,  and  the  3'ears  likewise, 
and  seasons  as  now  ordained,  must  commence,  before  vegetable  and 
animal  life,  as  they  now  exist,  could  thrive. 

In  perfect  keeping  with  these  scientific  requirements,  as  any  one  can 
see,  is  the  Mosaic  account: 

"  Then  said  God,  Lights  be  in  the  expanse  of  the  heavens  to  divide 
between  the  day  and  between  the  night ;  and  let  them  be  for  signs, 
and  for  seasons,  and  for  days,  and  3'ears.  And  let  them  be  for  lights 
in  the  expanse  of  the  heavens,  to  shine  upon  the  earth:  and  it  was  so. 
Then  (xod  displayed  the  two  great  lights,  the  greater  light  to  rule 
the  day,  the  little  light  to  rule  the  night,  and  the  stars.  Then  God 
displayed  them  in  the  expanse  of  the  heavens,  to  shine  upon  the  earth. 
And  to  rule  over  the  day  and  over  the  night,  and  to  divide  between  the 
light  and  between  the  darkness  :  then  God  saw  that  it  was  good.  Then 
was  evening,  then  was  morning ;  day  fourth."  ^^ 

The  evening  came,  the  sun  set  clear  for  the  first  time  since  the  Drift 
period  had  clouded  tlie  earth,  ^id  an  ordinary  night  of  twelve  hours, 


36  MOSAIC   RECORD 

spangled  with  stars,  stars  which,  perhaps,  had  been  clouded  for  thou- 
sands of  ages,  rested  upon  the  renewed  and  peaceful  world. 

The  type  or  the  prophecy  of  this  fourth  Mosaic  or  solar  day  is 
found  in  the  clearing  up  of  the  dense  atmosphere  which  succeeded 
the  Ca?'bon{ferous  period,  a  clearing  up  extending  through  millions  of 
ordinary  days  and  nights. 

Returning  to  the  Bible  record,  we  observe  that  these  four  Mosaic 
days  had  witnessed  wonderful  changes.  The  darkness  had  given  place 
to  light ;  the  atmosphere  had  expanded ;  the  waters  had  receded  ;  the 
vegetable  productions  had  appeared ;  the  sun  had  shone  forth,  and  every- 
thing was  in  readiness  for  further  divine  unfoldings.  In  a  word,  the  forest 
solitudes,  and  the  grassy  hillsides,  and  the  water-brooks,  and  the  rivers, 
the  lakes,  and  the  seas,  were  waiting  to  welcome  the  coming  of  their 
ordained  tenants.  Ah  !  but  how  did  they  come,  or  how  could  they 
come  ?  Whence  these  primitive  immigrants  ?  There  could  have  been 
no  hen  without  an  egg,  and  there  could  have  been  no  egg  without  a 
hen ;  whence  the  first  hen,  or  the  first  egg  ?  The  Mosaic  account 
responds  thus  : 

"  Then  said  God,  Let  the  waters  swarm  with  animal  life,  and  let 
birds  fly  above  the  earth,  upon  the  face  of  the  expanse  of  the  skies. 
Then  God  created  the  great  fishes,  and  every  living,  breathing  thing 
that  creepeth,  with  which  the  waters  abounded,  after  their  kind,  and 
every  bird  of  wing  after  its  kind ;  then  God  saw  that  it  was  good.  Then 
God  blessed  them,  saying,  Be  fruitful  and  multiply,  and  fill  the  waters 
in  the  seas,  and  let  the  fowl  multiply  in  the  land.  Then  was  evening, 
then  was  morning;  day  fifth." 

Great  is  this  creative  might  and  majesty.  Between  sun  and  sun  of  a 
single  day,  the  waters  and  the  atmosphere  received  their  modern  inhabi- 
tants, at  a  word  of  command.  The  creations  of  this  fifth  day  are  the 
antitype  of  which  the  earlier  reptilian  monsters  of  the  geological  ages 
were  the  type  and  prophecy. 

From  this  point  the  Bible  record  moves  on  in  sublime  and  triumphant 
grandeur.     At  the  dawn  of  the  sixth  Mosaic  day  we  read  : 

"  Then  said  God,  Let  the  hxnd  bring  forth  the  living  breather  after 
its  kind,  cattle,  and  creeper,  and  beast  i>f  the  land  after  its  kind :  and  it 


AND   MODERN    SCIENCE.  37 

was  SO.  Then  God  made  the  beast  of  the  land  after  its  kind,  and  the 
cattle  after  their  kind,  and  every  creeper  of  the  soil  after  its  kind  :  then 
God  saw  it  was  good." 

And  then,  last  of  all,  and  at  the  head  of  all,  —  after  all  else  was  fully 
prepared ;  after  the  vast  cosraical  eras  had  performed  their  part ;  after  the 
granite  had  been  formed  and  piled  up  in  lofty  mountain-ranges ;  after 
the  flowing  and  returning  waters  had  selected  and  borne  down  into 
distant  vales  the  vegetable  soils;  after  electric  shocks  had  interlaced  the 
earth  with  metallic  veins ;  after  the  ancient  forests  had  hardened  into 
coal,  and  were  stored  up  by  the  cubic  mile,  having  yielded  also  their  res- 
ervoirs of  petroleum  ;  after  the  deposits  of  primeval  Avaters  had  become 
iron  and  crystal  salt ;  after  successive  races  of  animals  had  become  a 
multitude  of  useful  material;  after  reptiles  had  cleared  the  waters  of 
impurities  and  the  land  of  rubbish;  after  birds  had  devoured  the  animal 
remains  and  enriched  the  soil ;  and  after  the  appearance  and  disappear- 
ance of  the  monster  mammals  of  the  geological  epochs,  which  were  the 
type  and  prophecy  of  the  animals  of  the  sixth  Mosaic  day ;  after  the 
great  floods  had  been  rolled  back,  and  the  dome  overhead  had  been 
lighted  up,  and  the  earth's  surface  had  been  carpeted  with  delicate  and 
soft  green;  after  the  rich  profusion  of  natural  scenery  had  been  prepared; 
the  flowers  filled  with  fragrance,  the  trees  hung  with  delicious  fruit ;  — 
then  "  created  God  the  man  in  his  own  image,  in  the  image  of  God 
created  he  him  ;  male  and  female  created  he  them.  Then  was  evening, 
then  was  morning  ;  day  sixth." 

And  how  can  unprejudiced  scientists  well  do  otherwise  than  bow 
their  heads  in  acknowledgment,  saying,  "Lastly,  God,  or  Something 
not  ourselves,  infinite  in  Vt^isdom,  power,  and  majesty,  whose  work  is 
miraculous.,  jJfophetic.,  and  orderly,  created  man  in  his  own  image"?  But 
there  are  those,  a  few  only,  who  speak  otherwise.  They  search  for  a  dif- 
ferent solution  of  the  human  problem,  and  hypothesize,  saying,  "  Lastly, 
man  was  evolved ;  he  was  evolved  male  and  female,  and  was  developed 
from  lower  orders  through  processes  of  natural  selection,  and  under  the 
law  of  the  survival  of  the  fittest" 


38  MOSAIC   EECOED 


YIII. 

THE   SEVENTH  DAY. 

Before  attempting  to  search  for  a  harmony  between  Revelation  and 
Science  as  to  the  origin  of  life,  we  review  certain  discussions  bearing 
upon  the  Seventh  day. 

Both  those  who  advocate  the  long  periods,  and  those  who  maintain 
the  solar-day  theory  of  creation,  claim  that  the  Mosaic  account  of  the 
seventh  day  establishes  their  peculiar  views.  As  God  is  now  resting, 
and  has  been  doing  so  for  the  past  six  thousand  years,  and  as  the 
seventh  day  was  like  the  other  six  days,  therefore,  as  is  claimed,  the 
other  six  days  were  not  solar,  but  of  indefinite  duration.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  argued,  that  the  context  shows  that  Moses,  when  speaking 
of  the  Sabbath,  had  in  mind,  not  an  epoch  of  indefinite  length,  but  an 
ordinary  solar  day ;  therefore,  as  all  the  seven  days  are  alike,  the  six 
days  must  be,  not  of  indefinite  length,  but  ordinary  solar  days.  Thus 
one  party  apparently  has  as  good  ground  for  its   argument  as  the  other. 

A  careful  analysis  of  the  subject  will  show,  however,  that  the  Mosaic 
account  of  the  Sabbath  ought  not  by  either  party  to  be  too  much 
involved  nor  depended  upon,  in  connection  with  the  question  of  the 
length  of  the  creative  days.  That  account,  in  fact,  cannot  be  adduced 
exclusivelj^  in  support  of  either  side  of  the  discussion. 

To  make  this  statement  clear,  attention  is  called,  firsts  to  the  exe- 
gesis of  the  passages  referring  to  the  Sabbath,  and  second,  to  certain 
related  scientific  facts.  An  exact  translation  of  the  second  chapter  of 
Genesis,  first  and  third  verses  inclusive,  is  the  following  : 

"  Then  were  finished  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and  all  the  host 
of  them.  Then  finished  God  on  the  seventh  day  his  work  which  he 
had  made  ;  and  rested  on  the  seventh  day  from  all  his  work  which 
he  had  made.    Then  blessed  God  the    seventh  day,   and   hallowed  it  ; 


AND   MODERN   SCIENCE.  39 

because  in  it  he  had  rested  from  all  his  work,  which  created  had  God 
to  make." 

With  this  should  be  connected  Exodus  xx.  8-11. 

'*  Remember  the  sabbath-day,  to  keep  it  holy.  Six  days  shalt  thou 
labor,  and  do  all  thy  work  :  but  the  seventh  day  is  the  sabbath  of  the 
Lord  thy  God :  in  it  thou  shalt  not  do  any  work,  thou,  nor  th}'  son,  nor 
thy  daughter,  thy  man-servant,  nor  thy  maid-servant,  nor  thy  cattle, 
nor  thy  stranger  that  is  within  th}^  gates.  For  in  six  days  the  Lord 
made  heaven  and  earth,  the  sea,  and  all  that  in  tliem  is,  and  rested  the 
seventh  day  :  wherefore  the  Lord  blessed  the  sabbath-day  and  hallowed 
it."     Compare  also  Exodus  xvi.  22-27. 

The  reader  will  notice  that  in  certain  respects  the  seventh  day  in  the 
]\Iosaic  record  is  clearly  distinguished  from  the  other  six  da}-^.  The  nar- 
rative, for  instance,  is  occupied,  in  the  case  of  the  six  days,  with  the  work 
accomplished  in  each,  but  on  the  other  hand,  the  seventh  day  is  itself 
the  subject  of  the  narration.  Each  of  the  six  work-da3-s  closes  with  a 
specific  formula,  —  "morning  and  evening."  We  therefore  naturally 
look  for  the  expression,  "  and  the  evening  and  the  morning  were  the 
seventh  day,"  but  such  is  not  the  record.  The  conviction  will,  there- 
fore, fasten  itself  upon  any  one  believing  in  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible, 
that  there  must  be  some  adequate  reason  for  this  remarkable  omission 
of  what  had  been  so  regularly  repeated  at  the  close  of  all  the  preceding- 
days  or  epochs. 

Before  giving  an  explanation  of  this  omission,  we  call  attention  to 
the  words,  "  And  on  the  seventh  day  God  ended  his  work  which  he  had 
made,"  and  to  the  fact  that  geology  presents  no  evidence  of  the  produc- 
tion of  any  new  species  of  plant  or  animal  since  the  creation  of  man. 
"It  is  the  report  of  all  sciences  bearing  upon  this  subject,  that  thousands 
of  years  have  swept  by  since  God  ended  his  work  of  creation,  without 
witnessing  a  new  order  of  being.  Works  of  necessity  —  works  of  prov- 
idence and  mercy  —  he  still  carries  on.  '  My  Father  worketh  hitherto, 
and  I  work.'  "  But  creation  is  not  a  work  of  necessity.  That  work  he 
ended  at  the  close  of  the  far-off  sixth  day,  and  ever  since  has  rested. 
This  rest  is  not  in  consequence  of  the  fact  that  God  is  tired,  but  only  be- 
cause his  creative  designs  under  the  present  dispensation  are  completed. 


40  MOSAIC   EECORD 

In  a  word,  the  facts,  according  to  the  record,  appear  to  be  these: 
After  the  six  long  geological  periods  had  passed,  and  after  the  six  solar 
days  of  the  Mosaic  record  were  brought  to  a  close,  then  the  Eternal 
One,  first,  ceased  from  his  work,  and  second,  he  rested.  That  is,  he 
rested  during  the  hours  of  the  solar  day  following  the  six  preceding 
solar  days. 

Of  the  long  period,  including  the  time  from  that  first  solar  Sabbath 
to  the  present,  Moses  does  not  speak  definitely,  though  the  absence  of 
the  formula,  "  evening  and  morning,"  may  lead  us  to  infer  that  each 
recurring  Sabbath-day  is  a  moving  type  of  which  the  last  six  thousand 
years  are  the  staiidiiig  antitype.  The  solar  Sabbath,  the  type,  has  its 
recurring  dawn  and  twihght  ;  it  comes  and  goes.  But  the  divine  Sab- 
batical epoch  continues  without  its  recurring  dawn  and  twilight.  The 
solar  or  Mosaic  Sabbath  is  a  weekly  prophecy  of  the  Sabbath  epoch  in 
which  we  now  live,  but  whose  morning  has  hardly  yet  dawned.  In  the 
words  of  a  thoughtful  writer: 

"We  are  still  in  the  Sabbath  eve,  unless  Christ's  ascension  were  its  terminating 
era.  But  what  that  Sabbath  morning  may  be,  we  must  learn  from  the  Scriptures  or 
never  know  at  all.  The  Bible  speaks  of  '  the  morning  of  the  resurrection.'  Is  it  a 
mere  figure,  or  something  more  than  a  figure,  —  a  reality  transcending  in  literal  and 
substantial  glory  any  of  the  matutinal  jjeriods  of  the  earth's  early  physical  forma- 
tion? There  is  the  'morning  when  the  upright  shall  have  the  dominion,'  which 
dominion  may  be  on  this  very  jjlanet.  Or  if  this  is  thought  to  have  too  much  difii- 
culty  attending  it,  there  is  also  that  morning  of  the  latter-day  glory  whose  auroral 
effulgence  is  so  vividly  pictured  by  the  rapt  Hebrew  seers,  —  that  glorious  morning 
when  'Zion  shall  have  put  on  her  beautiful  garments,'  her  spotless  Sabbath  robes,  — 
when  the  Church  for  which  the  earth  was  made,  '  shall  rise  and  shine,  fur  her  Light 
has  come  and  the  glory  of  her  Lord  has  risen  upon  her,' — when  nations  sliall  go  by 
her  liyht  and  kings  by  the  splendor  of  her  rising,'  —  when  her  risen  'sun  shall  never 
more  go  down,  for  the  Lord  shall  be  her  everlasting  light  and  her  God  her  glory.' 
Instead  of  mediate  or  reflexive  illumination  through  the  heavenly  bodies, 

'  The  Liirlit  Himself  sliall  shine 
Revealed,  —  and  God's  Eternal  Day  be  thine.' " 


AND   MODERN  SCIENCE.  4l 


IX. 

ORIGIN    OF    LIGHT  AND    LIFE,  AND    CREATION 

OF    MAN. 

Though  it  could  be  proved  beyond  question  that  the  order  of  the 
creation  and  development  of  the  physical  universe  as  recorded  by 
Moses  is  identical  wiih  that  discovered  by  modern  science,  still  the 
fundamental  question  as  to  the  efficient  cause  of  that  cieation  and 
development  would  remain  unsettled.  The  theist  of  whatever  school 
would  continue  to  affirm  that  God  is  the  ultimate  cause  of  all  things, 
while  the  atheist  would  just  as  resolutely  affirm  that  natural  forces  have 
created  and  developed  all  things,  and  that  there  is  no  God  except  natural 
forces.  Hence,  the  fiercest  conflicts  between  belief  and  unbelief,  in  the 
future  as  in  the  past,  will  be  waged  about  questions  relating  to  the 
origin  of  matter  and  life,  including  the  life  of  vegetation,  that  of  brute 
creations,  and  of  man. 

As  to  the  origin  of  matter,  the  Mosaic  account  is  silent.  The  gen- 
eral opinion  concerning  the  material  substances  comprising  the  present 
physical  system,  is,  that  they  are  destitute  of  the  properties  of  neces- 
sary existence,  and  therefore  are  not  eternal.  That  is,  we  can  conceive 
of  matter  in  its  present  forms,  also  in  any  form,  as  not  existing;  but, 
on  the  other  hand,  we  cannot  conceive  of  duration  of  space  and  of 
mathematical  axioms  as  not  existing.  It  is,  therefore,  generally  felt  that 
matter  is  not  a  necessary  existence,  like  duration,  space,  &c.,  and  must 
have  had  a  beginning,  not  from  chance,  or  by  some  blind  law  of  develop- 
ment, but  through  infinite  power  and  intelligence. 

Such,  we  repeat,  are  the  views  generally  held ;  still,  it  must  be  borne 
in  mind  that  apparently  the  origin  of  matter  is  not  discussed  in  the 
Mosaic  record,  hence  we  do  not  feel  called  upon  in  this  treatise  to 
defend  or  to  combat  any  existing  theory  as  to  the  beginning  of  matter. 


42  MOSAIC    RECORD 

In  the  first  verse  of  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  the  word  translated 
"created  "is  hara^  whose  primary  meaning  is  to  cut,  hence  to  shave, 
shape,  form,  or  fashion.  So,  also,  the  German  word  schaffen,  by  which 
Luther  translates  bat^a,  being  of  the  same  root  with  schahen  (Belgic 
schaeven'),  which  means  to  shave,  cut,  hence  to  make  or  fabricate  out  of 
existing  materials.  It  is  this  idea  of  makmg,  which  consists  in  cuttings, 
separations,  and  arrangements  by  division  of  what  previously  exists, 
instead  of  the  production  of  something  from  nothing,  which  jNIoses  seems 
to  have  had  in  mind.^^ 

Passing,  therefore,  from  the  question  of  the  origin  of  matter,  we 
find  that  the  Mosaic  record  reveals  the  fact  that  there  was  a  time  when, 
within  the  limits  of  the  present  physical  universe,  light  was  not,  and 
a  time  when  life  was  not.  And  between  the  theist  and  the  atheist,  as  to 
this  fact,  there  is  and  there  can  be  no  ground  of  controversy.  The 
primeval  absence  of  light  and  life  is  now  a  universal  admission.  But 
the  cause  of  light  and  the  cause  of  life  is  the  ground  for  a  conflict  of 
opinions.  The  atheist  says  their  production  was  spontaneous.  The 
theist  of  christian  faith,  on  the  other  hand,  accepts  the  statements 
of  the  Mosaic  record  that  it  was  God  who  called  light  and  life  into 
being. 

That  this  Bible  record  may  be  better  compared  with  the  developments 
of  modern  science,  we  reproduce  the  vital  points  revealed,  using  the 
lanofuacre  of  an  exact  translation,  selecting  from  both  the  full  account  in 
the  first,  and  from  the  abridged  and  corresponding  account  in  the  second 
chapter  of  Genesis : 

"  And  the  earth  had  become  a  waste  and  a  void,  and  darkness  was  upon  the  fVice 
of  the  deep."  Chapter  I.,  verse  2.  "Then  said  God,  Let  there  be  light;  and  there 
was  light."  Verse  3.  "  And  not  a  plant  of  the  field  was  yet  in  the  land,  and  not  an 
herb  of  the  field  yet  grew."  Chapter  II.,  versed.  "Then  said  God,  Grow  let  the 
land  grass,  herb  yielding  seed,  fruit  tree  bearing  fruit  after  its  kind,  in  which  is  its 
seed,  upon  the  land  :  and  it  was  so."  Chapter  I.,  verse  11.  "  Then  said  God,  Let  the 
waters  abound  with  the  crawler  that  hath  breath  and  life,  and  let  the  fowl  fly  above 
the  earth,  upon  the  face  of  the  expanse  of  the  skies.  Then  created  God  the  great 
fishes,  and  every  living  breathing  thing  that  creepeth  with  which  the  waters  abound 
after  their  kind  and  every  bird  of  Aving  after  its  kind."  "Then  said  God,  Let  the 
land  brinff  forth  the  living  breathing  thing  after  its  kind,  cattle  and  creeper,  and 


AND    MODERN    SCIENCE.  43 

beast  of  the  land  after  its  kind :  and  it  was  so."  Verses  20,  21,  24.  "And  there 
was  no  man  to  till  the  ground."  Chapter  II.,  verse  5.  "Then  said  God,  Let  us 
make  man  in  our  image  after  our  likeness."  Chapter  I.,  verse  26.  "And  the  Lord 
God  formed  the  man  of  the  dust  from  the  soil,  and  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the 
breath  of  life;  and  man  became  a  living  sovd."  Chapter  II.,  verse  7.  "And  the 
Lord  God  planted  a  garden  in  Eden  to  the  East ;  and  put  there  the  man  whom'  he  had 
formed."  Verse  8.  "And  the  Lord  God  said.  It  is  not  good  that  man  shoujd  be 
alone;  I  will  make  a  helpmeet  for  him."  Verse  18.  "And  the  Lord  God  caused  a 
deep  sleep  to  fall  upon  the  man,  and  he  slept;  and  he  took  one  of  his  ribs  and  closed 
up  the  flesh  instead  thereof  And  the  Lord  God  builded  the  rib  which  he  had  taken 
from  the  man  into  a  woman  and  brought  her  unto  the  man."     Verses  21,  22. 

Such,  in  brief,  is  the  Mosaic  account  of  the  shaping  of  matter,  the 
origin  of  light  and  of  life,  and  the  creation  of  man.  Whatever  may  be  the 
future  scientific  grounds  of  objection,  we  hazard  nothing  in  saying  that 
up  to  the  present  date  there  is  not  one  established  scientific  fact  that 
dis(?redits  in  the  least  this  Bible  record.  That  darkness  was  before  light, 
no  one  questions.  That  there  must  have  been  some  agency  in  the  pro- 
duction of  light  is  admitted.  There  could  have  been  no  effect  M'ithout 
an  adequate  cause,  and  a  cause  adequate  enough  to  fill  with  fire-light 
the  space  now  occupied  by  the  physical  universe,  must  have  heen  Infinite. 
It  is  not  the  slightest  relief  for  the  atheist  to  say  that  materials  were  so 
arranged  that  light  was  si^ontaneous.  In  spontaneous  combustion,  for 
instance,  when  substances  take  fire  of  themselves  by  the  evolution  of 
heat  through  the  chemical  action  of  their  own  elements,  there  are  first 
needed,  both  the  combustible  substances,  and  the  necessary  arrangements 
and  conditions.  Thus,  also,  there  must  have  been  the  previous  creation 
of  light-producing  substances,  and  there  must  have  been  the  required 
ari'angements  and  conditions  before  the  primitive  light  of  the  universe, 
through  spontaneous  combustion,  could  appear.  Hence,  if  original  light 
was  not  the  immediate  product  of  an  invisible,  potent,  and  intelligent 
agency,  it  must  have  been  the  spontaneous  product  of  materials  and 
arrangements  that  had  been  controlled  by  some  invisible,  potent,  and  in- 
telligent agency.  The  fundamental  scientific  and  philosophical  postulates 
that  "  something  can  never  come  from  nothing,"  and  that  "  more  can 
never  come  from  less,"  and  that  "  nothing  can  be  evolved  that  has  not 
been  previously  involved,"  and  that  the  force  in  "  the  coiled  spring  can- 


44  MOSAIC   RECORD 

not  more  than  equal  the  force  that  originally  coiled  it,"  proves  the  exist- 
ence of  an  original,  invisible,  potent,  and  intelligent  Agent  or  Agency  the 
moment  that  light  took  the  place  of  darkness.  Therefore  the  words  of 
the  Eternal,  "Let  light  be :  and  light  v^ras,"  can  never  be  condemned 
as  unscientific. 

From  light  to  life  is,  historically  and  logically,  a  natural  transition. 
The  simple  point  is  this :  Life  now  exists  upon  the  earth  ;  it  has  not 
always  thus  existed.  Whence  did  it  come  ?  The  Bible  has  given  an 
account  of  the  beginning  of  the  life  of  vegetation,  of  brute  creations, 
and  of  man.  Can  modern  science  give  a  better  solution  of  the  problem 
of  life,  or  present  any  reason  why  the  Biblical  account  should  not  be 
accepted?  That  scientific  men  of  the  materialistic  school  have  been 
making  the  most  determined  efforts  to  account  for  life  independent  of  a 
Supernatural  presence,  is  well  known  to  all  our  readers.  How  well  have 
they  succeeded  is  at  the  present  hour  an  interesting  inquiry. 

Professor  Huxley  and  others  have  often  stated  that  if  there  were  a 
few  germs  to  start  with,  then  from  these,  by  processes  of  development 
through  natural  selection,  a  man  even  could  be  evolved.  For  from  the 
lowest  germs,  as  is  claimed,  there  could  be  developed,  first,  moss  and 
worms,  and  then  from  these  could  be  evolved  higher  animals,  and  lastly 
man.  Now,  admitting  all  the  might  and  majesty  of  natural  selection 
that  is  claimed  for  it,  we  are  not  much  better  off  until  the  moss  and 
worms,  or  germs,  are  furnished. 

A  few  years  ago,  in  the  Glasgow  meeting  of  the  British  Association, 
Sir  William  Thomson  presented  the  working  hypothesis,  that  certain 
meteoric  fragments,  in  time  past,  brought  to  this  world  from  other 
planets-  the  seeds  and  germs  of  all  things  now  existing.  At  the  outset 
it  should  be  observed,  that  this  speculation,  in  the  light  of  astronomical, 
mechanical,  and  chemical  science,  can  never  be  established,  because 
white-heat,  resulting  from  the  passage  of  any  foreign  body  through  our 
atmosphere,  would  be  destructive  of  all  seeds  and  germs  of  life.  But 
suppose  this  theory  of  Sir  William  were  true,  still  the  perplexing  ques- 
tion remains :  How  came  the  germs  and  seeds,  the  moss  and  worms, 
upon  that  remarkable  planetary  fragment  ?  Here  is  at  most  but  a  tem- 
porary postponement  of  the  difBculty.     Back   of  these  shattered  planets 


AND    MODERN    SCIENCE.  45 

are  still  other  planets,  as  we  maj^  suppose.  But  after  passing  an  indefi- 
nite series,  we  must  at  length  come  to  a  dead-lock,  standing  face  to  face 
with  —  loJiat  ? 

Or,  without  going  beyond  the  surface  of  our  own  planet,  we  may- 
admit,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  that  the  materialistic  theories 
respecting  protoplasm,  bioplasm,  and  the  like,  shall  at  length  li^e  estab- 
lished, and  that  it  will  some  day  be  shown  that  from  this  "  matter  of 
life  "  has  sprung  the  lichen,  the  cedar,  the  bird,  the  animal,  and  man. 
There  is  no  likelihood  that  these  theories  will  or  can  be  established ;  but 
suppose  they  can  be,  does  it  therefore  follow  that  protoplas-m  is  ulti- 
mate ?^^  Is  there  no  query  or  curiosity  a  step  further  back  ?  Rather, 
when  protoplasm  is  reached,  scientific  inquiries  have  only  commenced. 
Tyndall,  Huxley,  Bain,  Drysdale,  and  Spencer  admit  that  tlie  action  of 
bioplasts  cannot  be  explained,'  as  yet,  by  merely  chemical  properties  or 
forces.  What,  then,  does  explain  their  action  ?  Should  we  admit  the 
development  and  protoplastic  theories  of  materialism,  still  the  atheistic 
difficulties  are  not  removed.  For  upon  scientific  grounds  it  is  discovered 
that  every  step  of  this  wonderful  journey,  from  moss  and  worms  to  man, 
bears  the  stamp,  not  of  chance,  but  of  design.  Who,  therefore,  the 
designer?  For  chance  is  not  a  designer.  As  Laplace  says :  "  We  have 
thereby  succeeded  merely  in  throwing  final  causes  one  step  further 
back." 

How  the  difficulties  confront  us !  To  repeat  expressions  already 
used,  there  can  be  no  woman  without  a  child  ;  there  can  be  no  child 
without  a  woman;  whence  the  first  child  or  the  first  woman?  There 
can  be  no  oak  without  an  acorn ;  there  can  be  no  acorn  without  an  oak  ; 
whence  the  first  oak  or  the  first  acorn  ?  There  can  be  no  living  bio- 
plasm without  previously  existing  bioplasm ;  and  there  can  be  no  previ- 
ously existing  bioplasm  without  —  previously  existing  bioplasm.  But 
whence  that  previously  existing  bioplasm?  The  chemist  can  just  as 
easily  make  a  world  as  he  can  give  life  to  a  bit  of  bioplasm. 

Hackel  says,  "  The  history  of  the  germ  is  an  epitome  of  that  of  the 
race."  But  the  life  and  existence  of  the  germ  are  as  unaccountable 
as  those  of  the  race.  The  theory  of  the  spontaneity  of  life  is  in  every 
way  unsatisfactor3%     The  closing  words  of  Professor  Tyndall's  recent 


46  MOSAIC   RECORD 

lecture  on  the   Origin  of  Life,   before   the  Royal  Institution  at   Lon- 
don, leave  no  chance  for  misunderstanding.     He  said : 

"  This  discourse,  is  but  a  summing  up  of  eight  months  of  incessant  labor.  From 
the  beginning  to  the  end  of  the  inquiry  there  is  not,  as  you  have  seen,  a  shadow  of 
evidence  in  favor  of  spontaneous  generation.  There  is,  on  the  contrary,  overwhehii- 
ing  evidence  against  it ;  but  do  not  carry  away  with  you  the  notion  sometimes 
erroneously  ascribed  to  me,  that  I  deem  spontaneous  generation  '  impossible,'  or  that 
I  wish  to  limit  the  j^ower  of  matter  in  relation  to  life.  My  views  on  this  subject 
ought  to  be  well  known.  But  possibility  is  one  thing  and  proof  is  another ;  and  when 
in  our  day  I  seek  for  experimental  evidence  of  the  transformation  of  the  non-livino- 
into  the  living,  I  am  led  inexorably  to  the  conclusion  that  no  such  evidence  exists,  and 
that  in  the  lowest  as  in  the  highest  of  organized  creatures,  the  method  of  nature  is 
that  life  shall  be  the  issue  of  antecedent  life." 

The  materialist  sometimes  calls  this  which  is  anterior  to  his  discoveries, 
"  a  mystery,"  which  we  have  no  right  to  examine.  We  ask  questions 
and  are  peremptorily  told  to  stop.  Now  we  insist  that  we  have  a  right 
to  examine  and  a  right  to  question.  Indeed,  it  is  cowardly  not  to  examine 
and  to  question.  Sir  William  Thomson,  in  his  triumphant  indorsement 
of  this  protoplastic  theory,  exclaims:  "  Now  that  we  have  settled  these 
vexed  questions  about  the  origin  of  life,  let  us  go  about  our  business." 
Settled  !  Go  about  our  business  !  We  cannot.  These  vexed  questions 
are  not  settled.  We  must  know,  first,  whence  came  this  wonderful 
life-stuff,  and,  second,  by  what  skill  it  has  been  arranged. 

Nearly  thirty  years  ago.  Professor  Taj^lor  Lewis,  discussing  the 
origin  of  life,  used  this  language :  "  But  how,  and  whence,  came  life 
itself?  Whence  the  primal  force  from  which  came  forth  all  these  mani- 
festations of  outward  growth  or  development.  The  untaught  Esqui- 
maux stand  on  an  equal  footing  here  with  La  Marck,  or  Laplace,  or 
Auguste  ^ompte.  Without  light  coming  from  above  the  plane  of  physi- 
cal causation,  one  is  just  as  ignorant  as  the  other."  Thirty  years  have 
made  but  little  change  in  scientific  opinion  as  to  this  subject. 

Professor  Tyndall  quotes  with  approval  the  following  words  of 
Dubois  Reymond :  "  It  is  absolutely  and  forever  inconceivable  that  a 
number  of  carbon,  hydrogen,  nitrogen,  and  oxygen  atoms  should  be 
otherwise  than  indifferent  as  to  their  own  position  and  motion,  past, 
present,  or  future." 


AND   MODERN   SCIENCE.  47 

It  is  remarkable  that  Professor  G.  F.  Barker,  in  his  address  upon 
Some  Modern  Aspects  of  the  Life  Question,  delivered  before  the  late 
session  of  the  American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science, 
held  in  Boston,  confesses  that  science,  after  the  most  rigorous  investi- 
gations of  the  last  forty  years,  is  as  much  in  the* dark  as  ever.  Still,  the 
Professor  does  not  despair ;  he  hopes  that  in  the  future  the  problem 
may  be  solved  upon  natural  grounds.  He  quotes  the  saying  of  Haugh- 
ton :  "  The  number  of  roots  in  our  equation  of  life  increases  the  diffi- 
culty of  solving  it,  but  by  no  means  permits  the  acceptance  of  the  lazy 
assumption  that  it  is  altogether  insoluble,  or  reduces  a  sagacious  guess 
to  the  level  of  the  prophecy  of  a  quack."  "  While  the  answer  is  not 
yet,"  continues  Professor  Barker,  "  a  thousand  earnest  seekers  after 
truth  seem  to  be  slowly  approaching  a  solution.  And  though  the  ignis 
fatuus  of  life  still  dances  over  the  bogs  of  our  misty  knowledge,  yet  its 
true  character  cannot  finally  elude  our  investigation.  The  progress 
already  made  has  hemmed  it  in  on  every  side  ;  and  the  province  within 
which  exclusively  vital  acts  are  now  performed  narrows  with  each  year 
of  scientific  research." 

The  Professor  then  shows,  first,  that  life  has  a  physical  basis.  He 
shows  that  all  muscular  motion  is  electrical,  and  then  proceeds  in  his 
specification,  employing  this  language  : 

"  Time  would  fail  me  to  discuss  the  many  other  phenomena  of  the  livins;  body 
which  have  been  found  on  investigation  to  be  non-vital.  Digestion,  which  Prout  said 
it  was  impossible  to  believe  was  chemical,  is  now  known  to  take  place  as  well  without 
the  body  as  within  it,  and  to  result  from  non-vital  ferments.  Absorption  is  osmotic, 
and  its  selective  power  resides  in  the  structure  of  the  membrane  and  the  diffusibility 
of  the  solution.  Respiration  is  a  purely  chemical  function.  Oxyhc'emoglobin  is 
formed  wherever  hasmoglobin  and  oxygen  come  in  contact,  and  the  carbon  dioxide 
of  the  serum  exchanges  with  the  oxygen  of  the  air  according  to  the  law  of  gaseous 
diifusion.  Circulation  is  the  result  of  muscular  eftbrt  both  in  the  lieart  and  the 
capillaries,  and  the  fliow  which  takes  place  is  a  simple  hydraulic  operation.  Even 
coagulation,  so  tenaciously  regarded  as  a  vital  process,  has  been  shown  to  be  purely 
chemical,  whether  we  adopt  the  hypothesis  of  Schmidt,  that  it  results  from  the  union 
of  two  proteids,  filirinogen  and  fibrinoplastic  substance,  or  the  latter  theory  of  Ham- 
marsten  that  tilirin  is  produced  from  librinogen  by  the  action  of  a  special  ferment. 

"One  function  yet  remains  which  cannot  be  altogether  omitted  from  our  consid- 
eration.    This  function  is  that  of  the  nervous  system.      In  structure,  this  sj'stem  is 


48  ■         MOSAIC   RECORD 

well  known  to  ns  all.  In  composition,  it  is  made  up  essentially  of  a  single  substance, 
discovered  by  Liebreich  and  called  protagon,  the  specific  characters  of  which  have 
lately  been  confirmed  by  Gamgee.  In  function,  the  nerve-cell  and  the  nerve-fibre  are 
occupied  solely  in  the  reception  and  the  transmission  of  energy,  which  is  in  all  proba- 
bility electrical.  There  is  evidently  a  close  analogy  between  the  nerve  and  the 
muscle,  the  axis  cylinder,  like  the  fibrilla,  being  composed  of  cells,  and  having  a 
positive  electric  charge  u2:)on  the  exterior  surface,  which  has  a  tension  of  one-tenth 
of  a  volt.     Haughton  attributes  tinnitus  aurium  to  the  discharge  of  nerve-cells. 

"The  higher  functions  of  the  nerve-cell,  those  connected  with  mental  processes,  is 
a  field  too  vast  to  be  entered  at  this  time.  The  double  telegraph  line  of  nerve,  motor 
and  sensor,  in  their  efiect,  but  as  Vulpian  has  proved,  precisely  alike  in  function, 
are  the  avenues  of  ingress  and  egress.  Every  sensory  imjjression  is  received  by  the 
thalami  optici ;  every  motor  stimulus  is  sent  out  from  the  corpora  striata.  In  tlie  acts 
denominated  reflex,  the  action  goes  from  the  spinal  cord,  and  is  automatic  and  uncon- 
scious. Should  the  impression  ascend  higher  to  the  sensory  ganglia,  the  action  is  now 
conscious,  though  none  the  less  automatic.  Finally,  should  deliberation  be  required 
before  acting,  the  message  is  sent  to  the  hemispheres  by  the  sensory  ganglia,  and  will 
operates  to  produce  the  act.  Based  on  principles  which  can  be  established  by  investi- 
gation, a  true  psychology  is  coming  into  being,  developed  by  Bain,  Maudslej',  Spen- 
cer, and  otiiers.  A  physiological  classification  of  mental  operations  is  being  formed 
which  uses  the  terms  of  metaphysical  psychology,  but  in  a  more  clearly  defined  sense. 
Emotion,  in  this  new  science,  is  the  sensibility  of  the  vesicular  neurin  to  ideas ;  mem- 
ory, the  registration  of  stimuli  by  nutrition.  Reflection  is  the  reflex  action  of  the 
cells  in  their  .relation  to  cerebral  ganglia.  Attention  is  the  arrest  of  the  transfor- 
mation of  energy  for  a  moment.  Ratiocination  is  tlie  balancing  of  one  energy  against 
another.     Will  is  the  reaction  of  impressions  outward.    And  so  on  through  the  list." 

It  will  be  noticed  that  Professor  Barker's  aim  is  to  show  that  all  the 
manifestations  of  life,  physical  and  mental,  are  made  up  of  protoplasm 
and  electricity.     The  conclusion  reached  is  the  following : 

"When,  therefore,  the  chemist  shall  succeed  in  producing  a  mass  constitutionally 
identical  with  protoplasmic  albumen,  there  is  every  reason  to  expect  that  it  will 
exhibit  all  the  phenomena  which  characterize  its  life ;  and  this  equally  whether  pro- 
toplasm be  a  single  substance  or  a  mixture  of  several  closely  allied  substances."  ^^ 

The  identit}^  of  vegetable  and  animal  life  is  next  established  by  the 
Professor : 

"  If  this  view  be  correct,  it  would  follow  that  every  individual  substance  found  in 
the  animal  —  save  only  those  which  result  fi-om  degradation  —  must  be  found  in  the 
plant  upon  which  it  feeds ;   and  this  is  the  fact.     The  evidence  then  would  seem  con- 


AND   MODERN    SCIENCE.  49 

elusive  that,  since  the  protoplasm  of  the  animal  and  vegetable  kingdoms  is  identical, 
the  former  in  all  cases  being  derived  from  the  latter,  the  animal  as  such  neither  jjro- 
duces  nor  vitalizes  any  protoplasm.  Two  inferences  seem  naturally  to  follow  from  this 
conclusion:  First,  that  all  the  properties  of  animal  protoplasm  and  of  the  animal 
organism  of  which  it  constitutes  the  essential  ])art  must  have  previous  existence  in 
the  plant;  second,  that  hence  the  solution  of  the  life  question  in  the  myxomycetes 
Avill  solve  the  life  problem  for  the  highest  vertebrate."  -^ 

Thus  havinL]j  shown  that  all  life,  vegetable  and  animal,  is  a  union  of 
protoplasmic  albumen  and  electricity,  Professor  Barker  might  have 
paused,  as  have  many  of  his  predecessors,  and  have  refused  to  listen 
to  the  next  question,  namely  :  Whence  this  protoplasmic  albumen  and 
electricity,  or  rather,  whence  that  which  energizes  the  albumen  and  the 
electricity  ?  But  he  is  too  fair  and  scientific  to  hesitate  before  that 
question,  and  therefore  propounds  the  ingenious  hypothesis  that  the 
source  of  all  life  and  energy  is  in  "  the  ether  of  space."  His  language 
will  bear  careful  study: 

"Xow,  as  Preston  has  suggested,  if  we  regard  this  ether  as  a  gas,  defined  by  the 
kinetic  theory  that  its  molecules  move  in  straight  lines,  but  with  an  enormous  length 
of  free  path,  it  is  obvious  that  this  ether  may  be  clearly  conceived  of  as  the  source  of 
all  the  motions  of  ordinary  matter.  It  is  an  enormous  storehouse  of  energj',  M'hich  is 
continually  passing  to  and  from  oi'dinary  matter,  precisely  as  we  know"  it  to  do  in  the 
case  of  radiant  transmission.  Before  so  simple  a  conception  as  this,  both  potential 
energy  and  action  at  a  distance  are  easily  given  up.  All  energy  is  kinetic  energy,  the 
energy  of  motion.  In  a  narrower  sense,  the  energy  of  matter-motion  is  ordinary 
kinetic  energy;  the  energy  of  ether-motion,  which  may  become  matter-moton,  fills 
the  conception  of  the  older  jwtential  energy.  Giving  now  to  the  ether  its  storehouse 
of  tremendous  power,  and  giving  to  it  the  ability  to  transfer  this  power  to  ordinary 
matter  upon  opportunity,  and  we  have  an  environment  compared  with  which  the 
strongest  steel  is  but  the  breath  of  the  summer  air.  In  presence  of  such  an  energy 
it  is  that  we  live  and  move.  In  the  midst  of  such  tremendous  power  do  we  act.  Is 
it  a  wonder  that  out  of  such  a  reservoir  the  jDower  by  which  we  live  should  irresistibly 
rush  into  the  organism  and  appear  as  the  transmuted  energy  which  we  recognize  in 
the  phenomena  of  life?  Truly,  as  Spinoza  has  put  it,  'Man  thinks  himself  most  free, 
when  he  is  most  a  slave.'  " 

We   could  hardly  be  justified  in  quoting  so  freely  from  Professor 
Barker's  address,  except  tliat  from   a  scientific  point  of    view   it  is  a 
remarkable  production,  and  also   that  it  is  the  latest  able  discussion  of 
4 


50  MOSAIC   RECORD 

the  problem  of  the  origin  of  life.  But  while  acknowledging  the  ability 
displayed  in  the  discussion,  we  have  to  express  the  regret  that  the  Pro- 
fessor has  not  brought  us  one  step  nearer  the  solution  of  the  problem 
of  life  than  we  were  before  listening  to  him.  We  are  no  better  off  with 
this  ether-space  theory  than  with  the  meteoric  theorj^  of  Thomson. 
For  admitting  that  all  energy  and  life  come  from  the  ether-space,  we 
are  still  left  to  inquire  what  or  who  treasured  this  world's  energ}^  and 
life  in  the  ether-space?  We  would  certainly  thank  the  British  Associ- 
ation or  the  American  Association  to  tell  us.  Meantime,  all  these  other 
questions  are  comparatively  but  the  prattle  of  children. 

There  is  a  phase  of  the  Mosaic  account,  however,  which,  in  the  light 
of  a  moderate  materialism,  deserves  a  passing  notice.  While  the  Bible 
clearl}'  teaches  that  life  ultimately  came  from  an  invisible,  intelligent, 
potent,  infinite,  and  personal  Intelligence,  it  does  not  teach  that  each 
original  plant,  and  each  oiiginal  animal,  or  each  original  species  of  plants, 
and  each  original  species  of  animal,  were  the  immediate  creation  of  that 
Great  Potent  Agency  which  the  Christian  calls  God.^*  The  possible 
meaning  of  certain  expressions  in  Genesis  is,  that  at  least  some  of  the 
animals  were  the  product  of  mediate  creation,  as  was  likewise  all  the 
woild's  flora.  "  And  God  said.  Let  the  earth  bring  forth  grass,"  &c. 
"And  the  earth  brought  forth,"  &c.  There  are  two  matters  here 
involved:  first,  the  creative  word;  second,  a  producing  energy  imparted, 
appaiently,  to  the  earth.  Whether  God  at  the  instant  of  his  command 
endowed  the  earth  with  inherent  power  to  generate  plants,  or  simply 
bade  the  plants  he  formed  to  take  root,  and  grow  from  the  earth,  cannot 
be  determined  from  the  Hebrew  text.^s  The  text  allows  of  either 
interpretation. 

Thus,  likewise,  mediate  rather  than  immediate  creation,  according  to 
the  Bible,  may  be  predicated  of  the  inferior  animal  life  of  the  seas  and 
of  the  land,  as  well  as  of  the  plant  life  of  the  earth.  The  English 
translation  conveys  this  idea:  "And  God  said,  Let  the  waters  bring  forth 
(swarm  or  abound)  abundantly  the  moving  creature  that  hath  life."  This 
refers  to  the  fish  and  reptile  races,  and  to  the  birds,  which  are  con- 
nected in  the  Bible  and  in  science  with  the  lower  forms  of  animal  life, 
in  a  manner  that  would  appear  to  imply  some  community  or  similarity  of 


AND   MODERN    SCIENCE.  51 

origin.  "The  prolific  waters  were  the  natural  bed  in  which,  through  the 
vivifying  agency  of  the  Ruah  Elohim,  or  Divine  Spirit,  originated  the 
first  'moving  things.' " 

Not  all  animals  were  thus  produced.  The  record  says,  "  God  created 
the  great  taninim^''' — rendered  the  "great  whales," — a  general  name  for 
the  leviathan  class  of  animals.  In  respect  to  this,  however,  there  may 
be  various  tenable  suppositions.  "  It  may  mean,"  as  has  been  well  said, 
"that  some  of  those  huge  creatures,  now  extinct,  and  whose  relics  so 
much  astonish  us,  were  special  formations,  like  man  in  a  subsequent 
peiiod,  —  so  specially  formed,  perhaps,  because  like  him  they  were 
intended,  in  their  period,  to  hold  an  analogous  though  much  inferior 
species  of  dominion  over  the  other  vegetable  and  animal  tribes.  It  may 
denote  that  this  production  out  of  the  earth  and  waters  was  confined  to 
the  fish  and  reptiles,  and  lower  classes  of  aquatic  birds,  whilst  the  higher 
terrestrial  animals  were  direct  formations." 

But  some  of  the  land  fauna,  according  to  the  Mosaic  record,  belong 
as  much  to  the  mediate  order  of  creation  as  does  the  earth's  flora  and 
the  lower  water  animals.  The  text  is  as  explicit  in  the  one  case  as  in 
the  other:  "Let  the  earth  bring  forth  the  living  creature  after  his  kind." 
This  refers  to  quadrupeds  and  land  animals  generally. 

Hence,  if  the  naturalist  saj's  that  originally  the  plants  sprang  from  the 
protoplasm  of  the  soil,  and  fishes  and  reptiles  from  the  protoplasm  of  the 
waters  and  mud,  and  tlie  smaller  land  animals  from  the  protoplasnt  of 
the  land,  the  Bible  student  should  not  hastily  raise  objections.  For  this 
idea  of  mediate  creation  through  the  agency  of  created  protoplasm  may 
be  exactly  what  Moses  means  when  saying,  "And  God  said.  Let  the 
earth  bring  forth  grass,"  <tc. ;  and,  "  Let  the  waters  bring  forth  abun- 
dantly the  moving  creature,"  &c. ;  and,  "Let  the  earth  bring  forth  the 
living  creature  after  its  kind,"  &c.  The  Christian  student  should  insist, 
however,  that  there  was  a  time  when  all  life,  vegetable  and  animal,  was 
not,  and  then  a  time  when  it  was ;  and  that  it  never  would  have  been, 
unless  an  Invisible  and  Potent  Agency  had  commanded  it  into  immedi- 
ate existence,  or  had  energized  or  protoplasized  the  waters  and  the  land 
so  that  through  them  and  by  them,  as  media,  life  could  appear. 

The   creation   of  man,  according   to  the   Mosaic  account,  materially 


52  MOSAIC   RECORD 

differs  in  certain  respects  from  the  creation  of  vegetable  life  and  the 
life  of  brute  creations.  Vegetable  and  brute  creations,  for  instance,  are 
spoken  of  generically  as  species  and  races,,  with  no  reference  to  individ- 
ual j)rogenitors.  But  according  to  the  Mosaic  account,  God  made  not  a 
race  of  men,  but  a  man,  and  then  a  woman.  And  the  remarkable 
expression,  ''in  his  own  image,"  which  certainly  has  wonderful  depth  of 
meaning,  makes  a  clear  and  ineffaceable  distinction  between  the  human 
race  and  other  orders  of  the  animal  kingdom.^*^  As  has  often  been 
urged,  the  word  Adcnn  might  allow  that  the  account  is  generic  and 
not  individual,  but  the  context  utterly  precludes  such  interpretation. 
In  the  words  of  an  eminent  writer  and  scholar : 

"  The  particulars  which  are  given  i-especting  the  female,  her  origin  and  estab- 
lished relation  to  the  man,  stamp  upon  the  narrative  a  character  of  individuality 
Avhich  is  unmistakable.  The  entire  departure  here  from  the  langivage  used  in  respect 
to  other  races  puts  the  meaning  beyond  all  doubt.  If  anj^  fact  in  creation  is  clearly 
revealed,  if  there  is  any  one  placed  beyond  all  cavil,  beyond  all  room  for  any  honest 
difference  of  interi^retation,  it  is,  that  the  origin  of  the  present  human  race  was  from 

one  single  pair Humanity  proper,  or  the  human  proprium,  did  not  groio,  was 

no  work  of  nature,  but  had  a  divine,  a  supernatural,  an  instantaneous  beginning. 
There  was  a  time,  a  moment,  when  man  —  a  man  —  the  j^rimus  homo  —  began  to  he, 
who  a  moment  before  was  not.  There  was  one  in  whom  humanity  commenced,  and 
from  whom  all  subsequent  humanity  has  been  derived.  There  was  one  who  first 
began  to  be  a  man ;  and  this  principium  has  its  date  from  the  first  energizing  of  that 
higher  life  which  came  from  a  direct  inbreathing  of  the  Almighty  and  Everlasting 
Father  of  Spirits." 

It  is  upon  this  subject  that  the  atheistic  materialist  resolutely  antag- 
onizes the  Bible.  Man,  as  it  is  claimed,  in  common  with  all  brute 
creations,  is  a  development  from  lower  orders. 

But  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  evidence  of  this  assumption  is 
far  from  satisfactory.  Indeed,  it  is  so  far  from  satisfactory,  that  the 
majority  of  scientific  men  are  inchned  to  reject  the  hypothesis  of  man's 
evolution  from  the  inferior  species.^'  For  instance,  the  distance  between 
man  and  the  rest  of  the  animal  kingdom  is  now  generally  admitted  to  be 
nearly,  if  not  equally,  as  spanless  as  that  between  the  non-living  and  the 
living.  When  comparisons  are  instituted  as  to  the  cubic  capacity  of 
the  brain,  the  results  are  scientifically  startling.     The  size  of  the  brain 


AND   MODERN  SCIENCE.  53 

of  the  highest  capes  is  thirty-four  inches,  and  of  the  lowest  man  sixty- 
eight  inches;  here  hundreds  of  continuous  links  are  required,  but  not 
one,  after  forty  years  of  the  most  diligent  search,  has  been  discovered. 
Von  Bischoff  and  Welcker  have  shown,  furthermore,  that  there  is  a 
fundamental  and  bridgeless  distinction  between  the  orang-outang  and 
the  human  brains,  not  only  from  the  size,  but  from  the  important  physi- 
ological fact  that  their  evolutions  take  place  in  opposite  directions.  The 
latest  report  is,  therefore,  that  the  development  of  man  from  the  orang 
is,  from  their  internal  structure,  an  utter  impossibility.  Mr.  Minot  and 
others  have  agreed  that  man  and  related  animals  are  more  nearlj'  con- 
nected with  the  common  earth-worm  than  with  any  other  animal. 

In  the  matter  of  speech  and  as  to  the  monitions  of  conscience,  and 
in  all  aesthetic  tastes,  the  chasm  deepens  and  widens.  As  Sir  George 
Mivart  has  said  :  "  The  gorilla  is  no  less  a  brute  and  no  more  a  man  in 
all  distinguishing  characteristics  than  is  the  humblest  member  of  the 
monkey  family  to  which  he  belongs."  Darwin,  too,  admits  that  the 
utter  absence  of  links  between  apes  and  man  is  amazing. 

Mr.  Wallace,  a  disciple  of  Darwin,  though  differing  from  him  in  sev- 
eral points,  ably  maintains  that  natural  selection  in  no  possible  way 
could  have  endowed  the  wildest  savage  with  a  human  brain,  which  in 
size  is  but  slightly  inferior  to  that  of  the  profoundest  philosopher.  His 
exact  language  at  this  point  is  the  following :  "  The  brain  of  prehistoric 
and  of  savage  man  seems  to  me  to  prove  the  existence  of  some  power, 
distinct  from  that  which  has  guided  the  development  of  the  lower  ani- 
mals through  their  ever-varying  forms  of  being." 

Mr.  Wallace  also  confesses  that  natural  selection  could  not  have 
given  to  other  mammalia  a  hairy  covering  thickest  upon  the  back,  but 
to  man  thickest,  when  it  exists  at  all,  in  front ;  or  have  made  the  liand 
and  tlie  foot  of  the  savage  perfect,  adding  no  improvement  in  cases  of 
the  highest  culture  ;  or  have  perfected  the  human  lar3nix,  or  have  given 
power  to  conceive  of  God  and  immortality .^^  Professor  Dana  adopts 
a  modified  form  of  evolution,  yet  the  following  is  his  recent  statement 
of  the  point  before  us:  "  If  the  links  between  the  lower  orders  and  man 
ever  existed,  their  annihilation  without  trace  is  so  extremely  improbable 
that   it   may  be   pronounced    impossible."     Almost   the  last    words  of 


54  MOSAIC   EECORD 

Agassiz  were  these:  "For  the  development  of  man,  gifted  with  hioh 
reason  and  will,  and  thus  made  a  power  above  nature,  there  was  required 
a  special  act  of  a  being  above  nature,  whose  supreme  Will  is  not  only 
the  source  of  natural  law,  but  the  working  force  of  nature  herself.  This 
I  still  hold." 

Professor  Schmidt,  Dr.  Rud.  Virchow,  with  a  few  others  who  are  of 
the  extreme  wing  of  evolutionists,  believing  even  in  spontaneous  gen- 
eration and  kindred  views,  have  likewise  admitted,  not  only  that  no  links 
have  been  discovered  between  man  and  apes,  but  that  none  exist,  and 
that  none  have  ever  existed.  They  then  start  the  ingenious  supposition 
that  man  and  apes  have  sprung  from  some  lower  animal,  and  have 
developed  in  different  directions.  Dr.  Rud.  Virchow  thus  states  the 
hypothesis  : 

"The  natural  tlecluction,  therefore,  seems  to  be  that  by  progressive  development 
an  ape  can  never  become  a  man ;  nay,  rather,  that  this  very  development  has  created 
the  deep  gulf  between  them All  attempts  to  transform  onr  problems  into  doc- 
trines, to  introduce  our  theories  as  the  basis  of  a  plan  of  education,  particularly  the 
attempt  simply  to  depose  the  Church,  and  to  replace  its  dogma  by  a  religion  of 
descent  —  these  attempts,  I  say,  must  fail We  cannot  teach,  we  cannot  desig- 
nate it  as  a  revelation  of  science,  that  man  descends  from  the  ape,  or  from  any  other 
animal  —  we  can  but  designate  thio  as  a  iM'oblem." 

But  how  long  must  we  wait  for  a  solution  of  this  problem? 

Professor  Agassiz,  Jr.,  in  a  very  interesting  and  exhaustive  paper  upon 
Sea  Urchins^  before  the  late  American  Association,  utterly  despairs  of 
finding  the  missing  links  which  have  been  so  zealously  searched  for 
during  the  last  twenty  years.  He  concludes  his  address  with  the  follow- 
ing biological  inferences : 

"But  we  can  go  no  further  with  confidence,  and  bold  indeed  would  he  be  who 
would  attem^jt,  even  in  a  single  state,  to  trace  the  genealogy  of  the  inhabitants  fi-om 
those  of  ten  years  before.  We  had  better  acknowledge  our  inability  to  go  beyond  a 
certain  point;  anything  beyond  the  general  parallelism  I  have  attemjDted  to  trace, 
Avhich  in  no  way  invalidates  the  other  jjroposition,  we  must  recognize  as  hopeless. 
....  Ordinarily,  the  twigs  of  any  genealogical  tree  have  only  a  semblance  of  truth ; 
they  lead  us  to  branches  having  but  a  slight  trace  of  probability  —  to  l^ranches  where 
the  imagination  plays  an  important  part,  to  main  limbs  where  it  is  finally  allowed  full 
play  in  order  to  solve  with  the  trunk,  to  the  satisfoction  of  the  writer  at  least,  the 


AND    MODERN    SCIENCE.  55 

ritlille  of  the  origin  of  the  group.  It  seems  hardly  cre(lil)le  that  a  school  which  boasts 
for  its  very  creed  a  belief  in  nothing    which  is  not  warranted  by   eonnnon   sense, 

should  descend  to  such  trifling These  stages  are  the  true  missing  links,  wliich 

we  can  no  more  expect  to  lind  preserved  than  we  can  expect  to  lind  a  record  of  the 
actual  embryonic  development  of  the  species  of  the  present  day  without  direct  obser- 
vation at  the  time.  The  actual  number  of  species  in  any  one  group  must  always  fall 
far  short  of  the  jjossible  number,  and  for  this  reason  it  is  out  of  the  question  for  us 
to  attempt  the  solution  of  the  2)rol)lcm  of  derivation,  or  to  hope  for  any  solution 
beyond  one  within  the  most  indeflnite  limits  of  correctness.  If,  when  we  take  one  of 
the  most  limited  of  the  groups  of  the  animal  kingdom,  we  find  ourselves  engaged  in  a 
hopeless  task,  what  must  be  the  prospect  should  we  attack  the  problem  of  other  classes 
or  groujis  of  the  animal  kingdom,  where  the  si)ecies  run  into  the  thousands,  while 
they  number  only  tens  in  the  case  we  have  attempted  to  cxirry  out?  Shall  we  say 
'  ignorabimus,'  or  '  impavidi  progrediamus,'  and  valiantly  chase  a  phantom  we  can 
never  hope  to  seize?  " 

In  1857,  a  skull  was  found  between  Diisseldorf  and  Elberfeld  (Ger- 
many), since  known  as  the  Neanderthal  Skull.  It  has  been  extensively 
written  about  by  Buck,  Huxley,  Barnard,  and  others.  A  few  weeks 
since  this  relic,  which  has  been  claimed  to  be  that  of  a  being  which  links 
the  brute  to  the  human  species,  was  presented  before  the  British  Associ- 
ation at  Swansea  by  Professor  Schaafenhausen.  The  conclusion  of  the 
Professor  was,  that  it  is  the  skull,  not  of  a  semi-brute,  but  of  a  veri- 
table human  being.  Professor  RoUeston,  commenting  upon  the  skull, 
"announced  his  unhesitating  concurrence  with  the  German  Professor, 
that  the  skull,  exhibiting  though  it  did  such  low  development,  was  not 
that  of  an  ape,  nor  of  an  idiot,  but  that  of  a  savage  man  about  fifty  years 
of  age,  with  a  small  brain  no  doubt,  but  evidently  perfectly  well  able 
to  hold  his  own  in  the  struggle  for  existence.  He  was  a  man,  and  not 
the  '  missing  link.'  " 

No  scientist  present  at  that  meeting  of  the  Association  objected  to 
the  views  of  these  two  distinguished  scholars. 

Thus,  out  of  breath,  with  divided  ranks,  extreme  evolutionists  no 
longer  seek  to  bridge,  by  intermediate  forms,  the  ab3^ss  between  man 
and  the  gorilla,  but  they  daringly  venture  to  bridge  the  deeper  and 
broader  gulf  between  man  aiul  the  anthropomorphous  apes  on  the  one 
side,  and  some  unknown  animal  on  the  other.  How  modestly  Schmidt 
puts  the  case :  "What  future  times   may,   perhaps,   discover  are  inter- 


56  MOSAIC    EECORD 

mediate  forms  which  go  back  to  the  common  point  of  derivation  of  the 
present  apes  and  of  man."     "3/a^/"      '•''Perhaps!'^ 

We  need  not  multiply  references  and  quotations.  We  hazard  nothing 
when  saying  that  there  is  not  an  eminent  scientific  man  living  who  dares 
now  question  the  statement  that  not  "  a  single  plank  on  which  one  can 
tread  with  a  firm  foothold  has  yet  been  laid  over  the  chasm  which  sep- 
arates the  human  body,  mind,  and  soul  from  the  most  advanced  species 
of  the  brute  creation." 

Several  positions  can  now  be  assumed  without  fear  of  controversy. 
For  instance,  there  was  a  time  when  man  was  not ;  he  could  not  have 
originated  from  nothmg,  or  by  nothing;  there  is  no  clearer  evidence  upon 
the  exactest  scientific  grounds  that  he  was  evolved  from  either  moss, 
worms,  or  orang-outangs,  than  that  he  was  a  direct  divine  creation.  We 
therefore  challenge  any  scientific  man  of  whatever  school  to  show  that 
it  is  unscientific  or  unphilosophical  to  adopt  the  Bible  account  as  the 
wisest  hypothesis  or  solution  yet  offered  in  explanation  of  the  perplex- 
ing problem  of  man's  origin  and  development.^^ 

But  this  account  will  bear  a  more  rigid  examination  than  we  have 
yet  given  it.  Involving  with  that  account  other  points  of  Christian 
tlieology,  we  are  led  to  recognize  in  the  "  Creator  "  of  the  Mosaic  record 
the  "Christ"  of  the  New  Testament.  The  ^  God-said  "  of  Genesis  is  the 
""God-word"  of  John's  Gospel.  Moses  introduces  his  account  with  the 
words,  "  In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heaven  and  the  earth." 
John  introduces  his  gospel  with  the  words  : 

''  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and 
the  Word  was  God.  The  same  was  in  the  beginning  with  God.  All 
things  were  made  by  him  ;  and  without  him  was  not  anything  made  that 
was  made." 

The  Apostle  Paul  thus  expands  and  emphasizes  this  thought  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  first  chapter : 

"  God,  who  at  sundry  times,  and  in  divers  manners,  spake  in  time 
past  unto  the  fathers  by  the  prophets,  hath  in  these  last  days  spoken 
unto  us  by  his  Son,  whom  he  hath  appointed  heir  of  all  things,  by  whom 

also  he  made  the  worlds Unto  the  Son  he  saith,  Thy  throne,  O 

God,  is  for  ever  and  ever;  a  sceptre  of  righteousness  is   the  sceptre   of 


AND   MODE  UN    SCIENCE.  57 

thy  kino^dom.  Thou  hast  loved  righteousness,  and  hated  iniquity ; 
therefore  God,  even  thy  God,  hath  anointed  thee  with  the  oil  of  glad- 
ness above  thy  fellows.  And  thou,  Lord,  [the  "  God-said,"  the  "  God- 
word,"  the  "Christ,"]  in  the  beginning  hast  laid  the  foundation  of  the 
earth  ;  and  tlie  heavens  are  the  works  of  thy  hands." 

Christian  theology,  furthermore,  rej)orts  that  this  "God-word,"  though 
invisible,  is  still  present  with  his  people  ;  that  he  appeared  in  Judea 
eighteen  hundred  years  ago,  in  the  form  of  a  divine  man,  or  "  God- 
man  "  ;  that  before  this  he  had  frequently  appeared  in  visible  angelic 
shape  to  the  patriarchs,  and  that  not  far  from  six  thousand  years  ago, 
somewhere  in  Central  Asia,  in  a  place  called  the  Garden  of  Eden,  he 
appeared,  and,  as  a  miracle-worker,  from  the  dust  of  the  earth  built  up 
a  material  human  body  in  the  image  of  his  own  spiritual,  eternal,  and  to 
us  at  present  invisible,  body  or  organism.  The  Mosaic  record  is  explicit: 
*'  The  Lord  God  formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  and  breathed 
into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life;  and  man  became  a  living  soul." 
Professor  Murphy  translates  the  passage  thus:  "And  the  Lord  God 
formed  the  man  of  dust  from  the  soil."  It  has  been  well  remarked  that 
"  there  is  a  deep  significance  in  the  phrase,  'from  the  dust  of  the  earth.' 
High  as  may  be  our  celestial  parentage,  we  have  an  earthly  mother. 
The  most  touching  appellations  in  all  languages  are  expressive  of  the 
idea.  Man  '  is  of  the  earth,  earthy.'  He  is  Adam,  he  is  homo,  humus, 
humilis.  If  he  has  a  spiritual  life  which  connects  him  with  the  higher 
worlds,  he  has  also  an  animal,  and  even  a  vegetable  life,  that  links  him 
with  all  below." 

Li  this  connection  it  is  worthy  of  note  that  chemical  analysis,  after 
the  most  rigid  examination,  is  able  to  detect  the  presence  of  no  element 
in  the  human  body  which  is  not  found  in  the  dust  beneath  our  feet. 

Thus  the  body  was  full  formed  by  immediate  creative  agenc}',  and 
then  the  God-word  breathed  into  the  nostrils  of  this  fresh-formed  body 
"the  breath  of  life";  and  man  became  a  living  soul.^^  The  meaning 
is,  that  the  God-word  energized  a  thinking  soul  in  the  body  he  had 
made.  This  miracle  of  man's  life  was  wrought  with  mouth  to  mouth, 
as  if  Christ  designed  to  wake  man  to  consciousness  with  a  kiss  upon  his 
lips.     And  history  shows  that  with   the   tenderness  of  that  first  act  the 


58  MOSAIC    RECORD 

Creating  One  ever  since  has  followed  his  obedient  children.  And  more 
than  this,  the  world  of  philosophy  and  science  acknowledges  the  presence 
in  man  of  exceptional  soul-gifts  and  graces.  M.  de  Chateaubriand  pro- 
pounds a  very  interesting  question,  and  furnishes  a  suggestive  answer: 
"Why  does  not  the  ox  as  I  do  ^  It  can  lie  down  upon  the  grass,  raise  its 
head  towards  heaven,  and  in  its  lowings  call  upon  that  unknown  Being 
who  fills  the  immensity  of  space.  But,  no;  content  with  the  turf  on  which 
it  tramples,  it  interrogates  not  those  suns  in  the  firmament  above,  which 
are  the  grand  evidences  of  the  existence  of  God.  Animals  are  not  troubled 
with  those  hopes  which  fill  the  heart  of  man ;  the  spot  on  which  they 
tread  yields  them  all  the  happiness  of  which  they  are  susceptible ;  a 
little  grass  satisfies  the  sheep,  a  little  blood  gluts  the  tiger.  The  only 
creature  that  looks  beyond  himself,  and  is  not  all  in  all  to  himself,  is 
man."  Darwin  is  right  in  his  estimate  that  "  man  is  the  wonder  and  the 
glory  of  the  universe." 

In  a  word,  every  branch  of  science,  and  every  principle  of  philoso- 
phy, confirm  one  of  the  first  announcements  of  biblical  theology  —  this: 
that  the  Almighty,  in  crowning  man,  has  completed  an  exceptional  piece 
of  work.  Every  creature  bows,  as  God  solemnly  announces  man's  final 
inauguration  in  the  sublime  words :  "  Have  dominion  over  the  fish  of 
tlie  sea,  and  over  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  over  every  living  thing  that 
moveth  upon  the  earth."  Thus  it  remains  unalterable  from  that  day  to 
this  ;  six  thousand  years  have  made  no  changes.  Man,  in  his  exaltation 
or  humiliation,  in  his  civilization  or  barbarism,  is  still  the  monarch  of 
every  incli  of  this  earth  he  inhabits. 

The  account  of  the  origin  of  woman,  the  companion  of  the  man, 
through  whom  all  other  thinking  souls  have  originated,  is  given  in  the 
following  words : 

"  And  Adam  gave  names  to  all  cattle,  and  to  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and 
to  every  beast  of  the  field  ;  but  for  Adam  there  was  not  found  an  help 
meet  for  him.  And  the  Lord  God  caused  a  deep  sleep  to  fall  upon 
Adam,  and  he  slept ;  and  he  took  one  of  his  ribs,  and  closed  up  the  flesh 
instead  thereof.  And  the  rib  which  the  Lord  God  had  taken  from 
man,  made  he  a  woman,  and  brought  her  unto  the  man." 

This  language  necessitates  the   idea  of  a  sudden  and  supernatural 


AND    MODERN    SCIENCE.  59 

formation  of  the  material  organism  of  woman.  Does  some  one  object 
because  certain  difficulties  present  themselves?  But,  we  may  ask,  are 
there  fewer  difficulties  attending  any  other  supposition  ?  May  we 
repeat :  There  could  have  been  no  first  child  without  a  woman  ;  and 
there  could  have  been  no  first  woman  unless  she  had  grown  from  a  child, 
or  have  been  full  formed  by  supernatural  power.  The  first  child  or  the 
first  full-grown  woman  could  not  have  sprung  from  the  gi-ound  without 
supernatural  aid.  She  could  not  have  made  herself.  The  man  could  not 
have  made  her.  There  is  no  evidence  that  she  was  developed  from  lower 
orders.  She  must  have  been  some  way  made.  No  greater  difficulty 
attends  the  formation  of  woman  in  the  manner  recorded  in  Genesis  than 
in  any  other  way.  Indeed,  upon  all  modern  theories  of  bioplasm,  fewer 
difficulties  attend  this  Bible  method  than  attend  any  other  method  that 
can  possibly  be  named. 

Examine  the  details  of  this  remarkable  account.  Heroic  treatment 
was  the  one  known  to  the  ancients  ;  they  would  have  had  the  gods 
bound  Adam  to  a  rack,  and  then  have  had  them  wrench  a  bone  from  his 
side.  But  the  Lord,  the  God-man,  the  Christ  and  Creator,  caused  a  deep 
sleep  to  fall  upon  Adam.  The  most  approved  modern  medical  science 
could  have  done  no  better.  The  man,  to  employ  a  chemical  term,  was 
"etherized.''  The  words  "deep  sleep"  mean  entire  unconsciousness. 
Then  the  Divine  One  removed  some  part  of  the  flesh  and  bone  of  the 
man  near  the  breast,  closing  up  the  place  thereof  with  other  flesh,  (a 
perfect  though  rapid  healing  process,)  and  out  of  this  flesh,  bone,  and 
blood  of  Adam,  with  the  bioplasts  still  alive  in  it  and  upon  it,  he  made 
the  woman.  In  the  language  of  the  original  text,  "And  God  builded 
up  a  woman."  ^^ 

No  one  doubts  that  the  Creator  could  have  made  woman  in  some 
other  way  as  well  as  in  the  way  recorded.  He  could  have  made  her 
from  a  cloud  in  the  atmosphere,  or  from  the  foam  of  the  sea,  or  from  a 
piece  of  mountain  granite.  But  he  could  not  have  created  her  in  any 
other  manner  that  so  well  establishes  the  intended  and  ordained  union 
between  husband  and  wife  ;  —  a  union  so  well  established,  in  the  nature 
of  things,  that  a  departure  from  it  is  always  found  destructive  of  the 
highest  individual  and  national  prosperity.     "  It  is  worthy  of  note,"  as 


60  MOSAIC   KECOED   AND   MODERN   SCIENCE. 

Herder  remarks,  "  that  what  Moses  adds  is  an  elegant  description  of 
the  espousal,"  and  as  there  was  no  other  to  act,  God  himself  honored 
the  first  marriage  "by  appearing  as  bridesman,"  or,  in  the  beautiful  lan- 
guage of  the  original,  "And  he  builded  up  the  woman  and  brought  her 
to  the  man."  Here  was  the  birth  of  society.  Unity  of  blood  is  literally 
maintained.^^     Here  is  the  "  real  presence  "  and  a  Divine  succession. 

As  the  Creator  looked  upon  that  first  society  and  the  garden  home, 
he  could  well  say,  as  he  actually  did  say :  "  And  God  saw  every  thing 
that  he  had  made  :  and  behold  it  was  very  good." 

In  view  of  all  these  considerations,  is  the  Bible  student  extravagant 
in  saying  that  the  Mosaic  account  of  man's  origin  is  the  only  one  ever 
propounded  with  which  so  many  facts  of  science  and  philosophy,  of  provi- 
dence and  theology,  as  perfectly  harmonize  ?  But  every  philosopher, 
if  true  to  the  fundamental  principles  of  philosophy  and  science,  must 
accept  for  his  M^orking  hypothesis  the  theory  with  which  the  larger 
number  of  facts  agree.  In  other  words,  the  world,  upon  purely  scien- 
tific grounds,  must  accept  the  Bible  account  until  a  better  one  is  pro- 
pounded. But  a  better  one,  according  to  Christian  belief,  will  never  be 
propounded. 


SUPPLEMENTAL  NOTES. 


Note  I.     {Page  9.) 

It  appears  to  a  thoufrbtfnl  man  well-nigh  fatal  to  the  credibility  of  the  Bible  to" 
take  the  position  that  without  detriment  it  may  be  inaccurate  in  its  statements  upon 
all  subjects  except  those  that  are  moral  or  theological.     Yet  not  a  few  hold  such  an 
opinion.     Dr.  Frederick  Stevenson,  in  a  late  address  before  the  University  of  Ver- 
mont, employed  language  which  represents  this  class  of  writers: 

"In  my  view, —  and  I  say  so  frankly, —  it  is  a  mistake  to  expect  scientific  accu- 
racy in  the  Scriptures.  They  were  not  meant  to  teach  science  at  all,  and  I  see  no 
proof  that  the  writers  spoke  anything  on  scientific  subjects  but  the  current  ideas  of 
their  times.  They  knew  nothing  of  asti-onomy,  or  chemistry,  or  physiology,  in  the 
modern  sense  of  those  words ;  and  they  did  not  need  to  know.  They  had  to  do  with 
God,  the  soul,  righteousness,  the  evil  of  sin,  the  blessing  of  goodness ;  not  with  plan- 
ets, or  acids,  or  the  theory  of  digestion They  were  not  bound  to  do  for  us 

what  we  can  do  for  ourselves,  and  what  they  could  not  possil:)ly  have  done  without 
using  language  unintelligible  or  incredible  to  every  generation  before  the  present. 
"We  talk  of  scientific  difficulties  in  the  Bible  now;  but  who  in  the  ancient  world  would 
or  could  have  believed  the  Sacred  Book  if  it  had  stated  the  correct  theory  of  astron- 
omy? Remember,  they  had  no  telescopes,  no  scientific  instruments  or  calculations, 
and  the  theory  would  liave  contradicted  the  plain  evidence  of  their  senses  all  the  time. 
They  could  not  have  believed  it.  Difiiculties!  Our  difficulties  are  as  nothing  to  these. 
A  book,  to  be  believed,  must  be  understood ;  and  accurate  science  prematurely  written 
Avould  be  unintelligible  gibberish  or  incredible  paradox.  A  very  little  thought  will 
show  us  that  a  book  intended  for  all  the  ages  cannot  possibly  anticipate  scientific  dis- 
covery. Had  the  Bible  done  that,  it  would  never  have  been  read  believingly  till  the 
history  of  the  human  race  was  complete  and  the  millennium  fully  come." 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  fallacy  underlying  this  reasoning  is,  that  the  Bible  is 
purely  a  man-made  book.  The  question  is  not,  therefore,  whether  the  writers  under- 
stood all  science,  but,  were  they  God-inspired.  If  so,  all  allusions  to  science  should 
be  correct.     God  must  have  known. 

The  statement  of  Dr.  Stevenson,  that  a  book  intended  for  all  ages  cannot  possibly 
anticipate  scientific  discovery,  is  too  sweeping.     A  divinely  inspired  P>ible  must  i)re- 

61 


62  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

sent  facts  not  as  men  may  think  oi-  desire,  bat  correctly  and  truly.  In  this  connection 
it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  men  have  repeatedly  antagonized  the  Bible  upon  this  very 
ground,  that  it  has  anticii^ated  scientific  discovery.  Said  the  late  Professor  Lyell : 
"In  the  year  1806  the  French  Institute  enumerated  not  less  than  eighty  geological 
theories  which  were  hostile  to  the  Scriptures,  but  not  one  of  these  theories  is  held  to- 
day." ^  It  ought  not  to  disturb  any  friend  of  the  Bible  that  certain  false  theories  of 
scientists  are  op23osed  to  it. 

In  a  word,  the  Bible  nowhere  asks  at  our  hands  any  coAvardly  defence,  or  anything 
like  special  j^lcading.  When,  therefore,  the  man  of  partial  belief  in  Revelation  says° 
"The  Bible  was  not  intended  to  teach  science,  therefore  we  can  excuse  all  scientific 
inaccuracies,"  we  reply:  No;  for  if  the  Bible  has  allowed  itself  to  employ  false  state- 
ments  as  to  the  truths  of  nature  or  the  truths  of  mind,  then  it  no  longer  bears  the  im- 
press of  a  book  inspired  of  God,  but  bears  the  marks  of  a  purely  human  origin,  and 
belongs  among  those  books  which  may  shortly  become  obsolete  and  forgotten.  If 
allowed  at  any  one  point,  there  would  be  scarcely  any  limit  in  this  process  of  excuse- 
making.  For  some  one  else,  with  just  as  great  consistency,  could  say  that  the  Bible 
was  not  intended  to  teach  any  of  the  departments  of  human  philosophy,  therefore  we 
may  excuse  its  errors  in  philosophy.  Another  could  say.  The  Bible  is  not  intended  to 
teach  history,  therefore  historic  misstatements  in  the  Bible  may  be  allowed;  and  if 
they  exist  they  do  not  invalidate  its  credibility,  for  the  Bible  was  not  designed  to  teach 
history.     Mr.  INIurray,  in  one  of  his  sermons,  employs  this  language:  "The  Bible  is  a 

book  that  should  be  read  like  otiier  books,  in  a  broad  and  comprehensive  way 

The  length  of  the  creation  period,  the  tonnage  of  the  ark,  Samson's  strength,  the 
guerilla  skirmishes  of  the  Judges,  the  rams'-horn  signals  in  front  of  the  walls  of 
Jericho  — these  are  questions  about  which  no  sensible  Christian  cares  a  fig."  Now, 
for  our  part,  we  do  care  whether  or  not  the  facts  recorded  in  the  Bible  are  true  or  false. 
Their  trutlifulness  or  their  falsity  makes  all  the  difference  imaginable  as  to  our  fliith 
in  the  Book. 

We  are  much  better  pleased  with  the  confession  of  faith  as  stated  by  Sir  John 
Herschel:  "All  human  discoveries  seem  to  be  made  only  for  the  purpose  of  confirming 
more  and  more  strongly  the  truths  contained  in  the  Holy  Scriptures." 

Note  II.     {Page  9.) 

The  theologian  as  well  as  the  scientist  has  an  unquestioned  right,  when  seeking 
the  solution  of  a  problem,  to  adopt  what  is  termed  "a  working  hypothesis."  This  is 
a  supposition  which,  at  a  given  moment,  harmonizes  better  than  any  other  supposition 
with  all  the  known  facts  bearing  upon  the  case.  The  true  scientist  will  abandon  a 
given  working  hypothesis  for  another,  the  moment  a  better  one  is  presented.  In  pre- 
senting his  exposition  of  the  nebular  hypothesis,  which  has  since  become  so  celebrated, 
Laplace  says :  "  I  present  this  hypothesis  with  the  distrust  which  everything  ought  to 
inspire  that  is  not  a  result  of  observation  or  of  calculation."    Thus  Laplace  showed 


SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES.  63 

the  true  spirit  in  not  claiming  for  his  hyjjothesis  inf:illil>ilitj\  "  In  astronomy  there  is 
no  final  human  authority,  no  synod  or  council,"  says  a  distinguished  astronomer,  "but 
simply  an  appeal  to  reason  and  observation.  If  a  theory  or  a  discovery  be  true,  it 
will  stand  tlie  test  of  observation  and  of  calculation ;  if  false,  it  must  pass  away  to  that 
INIiltonian  limbo  where  so  many  things  have  gone  and  are  going." 

Note  III.  {Page  11.) 
The  nebular  hypothesis  as  framed  hy  Laplace,  supposes  that  the  matter  of  the 
solar  system  existed  originally  in  the  condition  of  a  vast,  revolving,  and  fiery  mass, 
which  gradually  cooling  and  conti'acting,  threw  oft',  in  obedience  to  physical  laws, 
successive  rings  from  which  subsequently,  by  the  same  laws,  were  produced  the  sev- 
eral planets,  satellites,  and  other  bodies  of  the  stellar  universe. 

Note  IV.     {Page  12.) 

Scientific  men  have  made  use  of  various  suggestive  terms  to  express  their  view 
of  the  creative  and  sustaining  power  of  the  universe.  Ilei'bert  Spencer  employs  the 
Avords  "Unthinkable"  and  "Unknowable."  Professor  Bain  speaks  of  matter  as  "a 
double-faced  Somewhat,  having  a  spiritual  and  a  physical  side."  Professor  Cliftbrd 
employs  the  word  "Cosmos,"  holding  up  the  thing  rejiresented  by  that  word  as  an 
object  deserving  worship.  Strauss  tried  to  rid  his  mind  of  the  idea  of  God,  but  the 
universal  beauty  and  fitness  of  things  compelled  him  to  see  a  something  which  he 
called  "The  All,  existing  in  and  for  itself  eternally."  In  his  work  entitled  "  Old  Faith 
and  New,"  he  goes  still  further,  and  says,  "We  demand  the  same  piety  for  our 
Cosmos  that  the  devout  of  old  demanded  for  his  God."  Dr.  Lycock,  followed  by  ]Mr. 
]\Iurpiiy  the  scientist,  designates  the  mai-vellous  skill  displayed  in  the  universe  as  the 
product  of  "unconscious  intelligence."  "In  the  present  state  of  our  knowledge," 
says  John  Stuart  Mill,  "  the  adajitations  of  nature  aff"ord  a  large  balance  of  probability 
in  favor  of  creation  by  intelligence."  Professor  Tyndall  often  employs  the  words 
"inscrutable  power."  Mr.  Mivart  uses  the  words  an  "internal  force,"  "a  single 
lorm  of  force." 

Note  V.     {Page  13.) 

"The  instability  of  the  homogeneous,"  and  its  "tendency  to  the  heterogeneous," 
appear  to  be  a  law  applicable  not  only  to  the  original  formation  of  the  jjliysical  uni- 
verse, but  also  to  its  present  order,  both  as  to  physical  existence  and  social  life.  But 
law  is  not  agency ;  it  is  method,  the  method  of  a  lawgiver. 

Note  VI.     {Page  21.) 
The  era  following  the  Reptilian  age,  also  the  one  following  the  age  of  monster 
Mammals,  ai-e  very  troublesome  to  materialistic  evolutionists.     Indeed,  the  hypothesis 
of  pure  evolution  seemingly  breaks  down  in  the  jDresence  of  this  class  of  facts,  in 
which  the  weaker  supersedes  the  stronger. 


64  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 


Note  VII.     {Page  22.) 

Since  writing  the  foregoing  quotation,  we  find  that  Professor  Winchell  has  modi- 
fied his  views  in  a  late  work  entitled  Preadamites.  The  conclusions  he  reaches  are  the 
following : — First,  The  biblical  Adam  was  a  representative  of  the  MediteiTanean  race, 
and  was  the  remotest  ancestor  to  whom  the  Jews  could  trace  their  descent.  Second, 
The  Bible  itself  clearly  implies  the  existence  of  non-Adamites.  Third,  Races  remote 
from  Palestine  in  the  times  of  Genesis,  could  not  have  descended  from  the  stock  of 
Noah.  FourtJi,  The  lower  races  could  not  have  descended  from  the  Mediterranean 
stock,  because:  (1)  a  vast  diversification  of  races  now  exists;  (2)  some  of  these  races 
are  greatly  inferior  to  the  Mediterranean ;  (3)  a  complete  differentiation  of  races 
existed  in  tlie  early  dynastic  periods  of  Egypt;  (4)  and  the  chronological  position  of 
Noah,  or  even  of  Adam,  is  far  too  recent  to  suppose  the  differentiation  began  at  the 
Noachic  or  even  the  Adamic  era ;  (5)  even  the  theory  of  the  Haraitic  origin  of  the 
Negi-oes  is  opi^osed  by  the  Bible  itself.  (6)  A  chain  of  profound  relationship  runs 
through  the  constitution  of  all  the  races,  and  they  may  be  regarded  as  genealogically 
connected  together.  (7)  The  initial  point  of  the  genealogical  line  may  be  located  in 
"Lemuria,"  a  hj-pothetical  continent,  now  submerged  by  the  waters  of  the  Indian 
Ocean.  (8)  An  early  and  profound  split  in  the  primitive  stock  is  represented  by  the 
woolly-haired  or  African  types,  and  the  straight  and  curly-haired  or  austro-oriental 
types.  (9)  The  African  stock  entered  the  continent  somewhat  north  of  the  Equator, 
and  dispersed  thence  southward  and  westward.  (10)  The  smooth-haired  stock  sent 
one  branch  toward  Australia,  and  anotlier  toward  Central  Asia.  From  the  latter  have 
proceeded  all  the  JMongoloids,  and  from  the  former  the  Dravidians.  (11)  The  Adam- 
ites are  an  offshoot  from  the  Dravidians,  and  showed  at  first  a  closer  approximation  to 
the  older  type  than  is  preserved  in  the  ]\Iediterranean  i-ace  at  present.  (12)  An  early 
branch  of  the  IMongoloid  stock  turned  westward,  and  occupied  Northern  Africa, 
Atlantis,  and  the  greater  part  of  Eurojie,  in  times  anterior  to  the  Kelts  or  the  Pelas- 
gians.  (13)  The  first  men  Avere  geologically  pre-glaeial,  and  their  antiquity  is  com- 
paratively great.  It  may  reach  a  hundred  thousand  years.  Prehistoric  Europeans 
were  jiost-glacial,  and  their  antiquity  cannot  be  carried  on  archasological  and  ethno- 
logical groiinds  beyond  five  or  six  thousand  yeai-s  B.  C.  As  to  the  creation  of  Adam, 
our  author  says :  "  Preadamitism  does  not  exclude  the  current  conception  of  Adamic 
creation.  It  admits  that  Adam  was  '  created,'  but  substitutes  for  manual  modelling  of 
the  plastic  clay  the  worthier  conception  of  origination,  according  to  a  genetic  method, 
and  thus  embraces  t!ie  Adamic  origin  under  an  intelligible  method  of  production,  so 
sublime  and  significant  as  to  include  the  whole  world  of  organic  beings.  That  higher 
perception,  whicli  is  a  function  of  reason,  clearly  discerns  in  derivative  origins  the 
perpetual  presence  and  potency  of  a  jjower  which  is  in  matter,  but  does  not  belong  to 
matter.  The  derivation  of  Adam  from  an  older  human  stock  is  essentially  and 
literally  the  creation  of  Adam." 

In  reading  this  volume  of  Professor  Winchell,  every  scholar  will  come  to  at  least 


SUPPLEMENTAL    NOTES.  65 

three  conclusions :  First,  The  Professor  is  guilty  of  sev(;r:il  self-contradictions.  Second, 
So  far  as  he  attempts  to  build  upon  the  Bible,  he  is  guilty  of  jiure  arrogance  in  arbitra- 
rily setting  aside  the  verdicts  of  Semitic  lexicographers  and  interpreters.  Tliough  an 
expert  in  science.  Professor  Winchcll  is  not  such  in  biblical  exegesis.  Third,  So  far  as 
lie  attempts  to  advance  beyond  his  earlier  conclusions,  he  is  excced'mg\y  sii2:>2)ositional. 
An  illusti-ation  is  foimd  in  his  discussion  of  The  Epoch  of  the  First  Man.  He  says :  "  Tjo 
the  determination  of  this  very  little  can  be  contributed.  The  earliest  men  left  no  records 
of  themselves.  The  very  country  in  which  they  lived  has  been  swallowed  up  by  the 
sea.  Their  monuments,  if  they  created  any,  lie  in  the  bottom  of  the  Indian  Ocean. 
Their  bones,  if  undissolved,  are  mingled  with  the  fossil  remains  which  must  await 
another  geological  convulsion  for  their  discovery  and  investigation.  But  the  indig- 
enous races  of  Africa  and  Australia  may  have  left  some  record  which  will  shed  light  on 
the  date  of  the  occupation  of  those  continents.  /  imagine  that  in  some  of  the  caverns 
of  Abyssinia  or  central  Australia  may  yet  be  discovered  relics  of  man  which  may  fix  his 
epoch  relatively  to  some  geological  event.  The  research  is  not  a  hopeless  one. 
Science  stands  ready  to  undertake  it;  and  I  doubt  not,  the  records  of  some  geological 
or  anthropological  society  will  one  day  tell  whether  man  lived  in  Australia  or  central 
Africa,  as  far  back  as  the  Miocene  age  of  the  world."  The  above  italics  are  ours,  and 
suggest  that  the  Professor  has  advanced  not  into  the  realm  of  exact  science,  but  into 
the  shadowy  domains  of  hypothetical  poetry. 

Note  VIII.     {Page  23.) 

The  importance  of  this  subject  may  justify  noting  the  liability  of  falling  into 
mistakes  as  to  the  antiquity  of  human  remains.  It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  many 
discoveries,  which  for  a  time  were  thought  to  establish  the  great  anti(iuity  of  man, 
though  appearing  in  reputable  scientific  publications,  are  now  distrusted  or  discredited. 
The  connection  of  human  and  mastodon  relics  near  Charleston,  S.  C,  is  a  well-known 
instance.  "The  deposits  here,"  says  a  writer  who  has  made  a  careful  study  of  this 
subject,  "  are  so  thin  and  superficial  that  it  is  very  difficult  to  be  sure  that  there  is  no 
mixture  of  dilFerent  ages,  the  more  so  as  the  bones  of  the  ordinarj^  ox  and  the  domestic 
hog  are  found  also,  neither  of  which  were  ever  indigenous  to  this  continent,  and  must, 
therefore,  be  specimens  introduced  by  the  modern  settlers."  Prestwick,  a  celebrated 
English  authority,  though  still  desirous  of  keeping  up  a  high  antiquity  for  man,  says: 
"I  do  not,  for  my  part,  see  any  geological  reasons  why  the  extinct  mnmmalia  shovdd 
not  have  lived  down  to  comparatively  recent  times,  possibly  not  farther  back  than 
eight  or  ten  thousand  yeai's."  And  in  another  place  he  remarks,  that  "the  evidence 
seemed  to  mc;  as  nuieh  to  necessitate  the  bringing  forward  of  the  great  extinct 
animals  toward  our  time,  as  the  carrying  back  of  man  in  geological  time." 

Again,  those  who  support  the  hypothesis  of  the  great  antiquity  of  mnn  constantly 
assume  that  all  geological  chaiig(!S  liave  required  vast  periods  of  time  for  tlunr  accom- 
plishment.    But  as  a  matter  of  fact,  there  have  been  great  changes  in  brief  periods. 

5 


QQ  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

For  the  following:  facts  we  are  indebted  to  Mr.  J.  C.  Southall,  Georg  Adolf  Ermann, 
and  Sir  Cliarles  Lyell :  — 

In  1819  the  British  part  of  Sindree,  in  India,  to  the  extent  of  two  thousand  square 
miles  of  territory,  was,  in  the  space  of  a  few  hours,  permanently  submerged.  Later, 
another  portion  of  Sindree  was  elevated,  converting  Sindree  Lake  into  a  salt  marsh, 
and  forming  the  elevation  of  Ullah  Bund  (Mound  of  God). 

In  the  Santosin  group  of  the  ^Egean  Sea  new  islands  have  suddenly  ap^^eared,  the 
latest  within  comparatively  a  few  years.  Between  1795  and  1812  a  lake  near  Ural, 
Siberia,  sunk  two  hundred  and  ninety-one  feet. 

Ermann,  in  his  "  Travels  in  Siberia,"  says : 

"The  ground  in  Yakutsk,  the  internal  condition  of  which  was  found  in  sinking 
M.  Shergin's  well,  consists,  to  the  deptli  of  at  least  one  hundred  feet,  of  strata  of  loam, 
fine  sand,  and  magnetic  sand.  They  have  been  deposited  from  waters  which  at  one 
time,  and  it  may  be  presumed  suddenly,  overflowed  the  whole  country  as  far  as  the 
Polar  Sea.  In  these  deepest  strata  are  found  twigs,  rocks,  and  leaves  of  trees  of  the 
birch  and  willow  kinds.  Eveiywhere  throughout  these  immense  alluvial  deposits  are 
now  lying  the  bones  of  antediluvian  quadrupeds  along  with  vegetable  remains." 

In  the  years  1826  and  1827  a  succession  of  earthquakes  so  changed  the  level  of 
the  land  along  a  coast  in  New  Zealand  that  the  sealers  could  no  longer  recognize  the 
locality;  and  a  hull  of  a  vessel,  sup^wsed  to  be  the  "Active,"  lost  some  thirty  years 
previously,  was  found  two  hundred  yards  inland,  witli  a  tree  growing  through  its 
bottom.  At  another  earthquake  in  the  same  group,  in  1855,  a  ti'act  of  land  equal  to 
four  thousand  square  miles  is  believed  to  have  been  raised  from  one  to  nine  feet. 

In  1772  the  volcano  Papandayang,  in  the  island  of  Java,  had  a  great  eruption,  by 
whicli  its  summit  sunk,  or  lost  in  some  way,  four  thousand  feet  of  its  height. 

The  famous  earthquake  in  Lisbon  is  well  known,  by  which  prodigious  physical 
effects  were  suddenly  produced.  Sixty  thousand  persons  were  destroyed  in  six  min- 
utes, the  quay  of  the  city  sunk  into  an  almost  fathomless  abyss,  and  the  shock  was 
felt  from  North  America  to  Sweden. 

The  beach  on  the  Frith  of  Forth,  in  Scotland,  has  risen  not  less  than  twenty-six 
feet  since  the  time  the  Romans  ruled  the  country. 

In  Peru,  in  1746,  an  earthquake  destroyed  Lima,  and  sunk  a  part  of  the  coast  of 
Callas,  so  as  to  convert  it  into  a  bay. 

In  1812  a  series  of  earthquakes  oecm*red  in  the  region  around  New  Madrid,  on 
the  Mississippi.  A  change  of  level  was  effected  so  suddenly  that  at  one  place  the 
river  for  a  while  reversed  its  course.  Lakes  twenty  miles  long  were  formed  in  an 
hour,  and  a  region  seventy-five  miles  long  and  thirty  miles  wide  is  now  known  as  the 
Sunk  Country. 

Tlie  disposition  that  could  be  made  of  human  remains  by  some  of  these  convul- 
sions will  suggest  the  unreliability  of  this  class  of  evidence  so  freely  quoted  by  advo- 
cates of  the  great  antiquity  of  the  human  race. 


SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES.  67 

There  is  equal  uncertainty  as  to  the  age  of  human  remains  found  in  various 
o-eoloo-ical  deposits  which  have  not  suffered  from  these  sudden  convulsions.  Notoriety 
was  given,  a  few  years  since,  to  a  human  pelvis,  found,  along  with  bones  of  the  mas- 
todon and  megalonyx,  lying  loose  in  a  ravine  near  Natchez.  "  The  trouble  about  this 
specimen,"  says  a  reviewer,  "  is  that  the  Indian  graves  at  the  toj^s  of  these  bluffs  are 
continually  caving  down,  and  mingling  their  relics  with  objects  at  the  bottom.  This 
class  of  specimens  is  notoriousl}'  uncertain,  and  no  experienced  scientist  attaches  any 
signilicance  to  them." 

Some  years  ago  two  men  took  a  finely-developed  Indian  skull  from  a  cave  in  the 
side  of  the  vallej%  and  placed  it  in  a  mining-shaft,  intending  to  have  it  fall  into  the 
hands  of  Professor  AVhitney  as  a  practical  joke.  It  was  successful.  A  workman  took 
out  the  skull,  and  afterward  gave  it  to  the  Professor,  who  was  so  satisfied  with  the 
evidence  of  its  authenticity  that  he  neglected  to  have  the  shaft  pumped  out  (it  was 
full  of  water  at  the  time  of  his  visit),  to  examine  the  ground,  and  see  wliether  the 
cave-stalagmite  adiiering  to  the  skull  could  be  accounted  for  on  the  supjjosition  of  its 
original  lodgment  in  the  gravel  of  the  pit.  lie  was  effectually  deceived,  and  believed 
the*  skull  to  be  of  Pliocene  age.  A  well-known  and  thoroughly  reliable  clergyman 
in  California  is  brother  to  one  of  the  men  who  placed  the  skull  in  the  shaft,  and  testi- 
fies to  the  fact  of  the  whole  thing  being  a  joke. 

Tliere  has  also  been  much  written  upon  tlie  antiquity  of  man  based  upon  tlie 
relation  of  the  stone,  bronze,  and  iron  age  to  one  another.  The  following  facts  are 
taken,  nearly  in  full,  from  a  careful  reviewer  of  this  subject.  While,  according  to  this 
authority,  it  is  generally  true  that  stone  is  earlier  than  bronze,  and  bronze  than  iron, 
still,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they  are  very  much  mixed,  and  sometimes  inverted,  as  in  the 
ruins  of  Troy,  wdiere  Schliemann  found  a  Stone  Age  later  than  bronze  and  iron  both. 
A  similar  mixture  is  found  in  Mexico  and  Peru,  whose  iniiabitants  used  both  bronze 
and  stone  habitually.  A  bronze  cell  was  found  in  one  of  the  oldest  Egyptian  pyra- 
mids ;  while  flint  implements  are  found  in  European  dolmens  and  tinnuU,  d.-iting  as 
late  as  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries.  The  Chinese  annals  show  tiiat  stone  Aveapons 
were  used  in  tliat  country  at  least  as  late  as  between  A.  D.  964  and  1279.  Stone  axes 
(clii-fon),  stone  knives  (chi-t'ao),  a  stone  sword  (chi-kien),  and  a  stone  agricultural 
implement  (chi-jin),  are  also  mentioned. 

In  the  ancient  monarchies  of  the  valley  of  the  Euphrates  metals  were  well  known. 
Rawlinson  says  (Five  Great  Monarchies)  that  "  in  the  very  first  age  of  Babylonia  a 
civilized  people  used  stone  and  metallic  implements  together."  "  In  the  Chaldean 
plain  the  tombs  and  ruins  have  yielded,"  says  Smith  (Ancient  History  of  the  East), 
"  knives,  hatchets,  arrowheads,  and  other  implements  both  of  Hint  and  bronze,  .  .  . 
chains,  nails,  fish-hooks,  etc.,  of  the  same  metal,  .  .  .  leaden  pij)es  and  jars,  .  .  .  arm- 
lets, bracelets,  and  finger-rings  of  iron."  Under  the  great  stone  bulls  of  Nineveh, 
which  had  never  before  been  disturbed,  Mr.  Place  found  knives  of  black  flint  along 
Avith  "  bracelets  and  necklaces  of  carnelian,  emerald,  amethyst,  and  other  hard  stones 
polished  and  fashioned  in  tlie  shape  of  beads  and  tlie  heads  of  animals." 


68  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

The  Ethiopians  of  tlie  Upper  Nile,  in  Ihe  time  of  Xerxes,  had  attained  a  high 
civilization,  yet  their  contingent  to  Xerxes'  army  used  stone  arrow-points  and  horn 
javelin-lieads,  —  a  striking  case  of  flint  implements  being  used  while  bronze  and  iron 
were  well  known. 

Rosallini,  the  companion  of  Champollion  and  other  explorers,  stated  long  ago 
that  knives  and  other  articles  of  flint  have  repeatedly  been  found  in  the  tombs  by  tlie 
side  of  the  Egyptian  mummies.  At  the  meeting  of  the  Institut  Egyptian,  M.  Mariette 
Bey  used  this  language:  "The  fact  that  there  are  found  (in  Egj^pt)  flints  worked  I13- 
the  hand  of  man  cannot  be  contested.  .  .  .  The  flints  in  question  do  not  go  back  to 
the  age  of  stone.  They  belong  to  the  liistoric  age  of  Egypt.  ...  In  all  historic 
antiquity,  even  to  the  time  of  tlie  Ptolemies,  flints  were  worked  on  this  plateau.  .  .  . 
With  the  flints  they  made  knife-blades,  which  they  fixed  in  handles  of  wood.  One 
finds  them  even  among  the  Greeks.  These  knives  are  sometimes  toothed  in  the  form 
of  a  saw.     In  the  third  place  they  made  lance-heads." 

In  Abyssinia  the  Bogos  still  use  both  flint  and  iron  for  implements.  ]\I.  Leemans 
says  that  an  ancient  Buddhist  temple  in  Java,  which  was  erected  about  A.  D.  700,  has 
its  walls  covered  with  bas-reliefs.  These  beautiful  sculptures  show  perforated  flint 
implements  with  wooden  handles,  and  pile  dwellings.  Herodotus  says  that  the 
Scythians  east  of  the  Caspian,  at  the  time  they  defeated  Cyrus;  used  gold  and  brass 
freely  about  their  weapons  and  armor;  but  "they  use  neither  iron  nor  silver,  Avhich 
indeed  their  country  does  not  j^roduce."  According  to  this  the  eastern  Scythians 
were  in  tlie  Bronze  Age  when  Cyrus  was  in  the  Iron  Epoch. 

Facts  show  conclusively  the  extensive  use  of  stone  with  both  bronze  and  iron,  not 
only  down  to  the  ]\Iiddle  Ages,  but  even  to  our  day. 

"  Possibly  some  future  arch^ologist  will  puzzle  himself  over  the  millions  of  gun- 
flints  used  and  lost  by  all  armies  fiftj^  years  ago." 

Remains  found  in  peat  bogs  have  been  supposed  to  prove  man's  great  antiquity. 
But  there  are  no  accurate  data.  Take,  for  instance,  the  peat  beds  of  Denmark. 
Mr.  Hudson  Tuttle  thinks  this  peat  is  twenty-two  thousand  years  of  age ;  Sir  Charles 
Lyell  thinks  that  it  may  have  been  sixteen  thousand  years  in  forming;  Steenstrup 
puts  its  formation  at  a  minimum  of  four  thousand;  and  Professor  Worsade  at  not  less' 
than  three  thousand.  These  difterent  estimates  forbid  anything  like  accurate  scien- 
tific conclusions. 

There  is,  on  tiie  Earl  of  Arran's  estate  in  Scotland,  a  jn-imeval  bog  and  forest, 
which  make  it  apparent  that  the  pine,  oak,  and  beech  were  not  successive,  but  con- 
temporaneous at  different  levels;  the  bog  growing  as  well  as  the  trees,  (thus  overtaking 
the  upper  species  last.)  Holes  cut  in  the  peat  of  this  estate  filled  up  at  the  rate  of 
three  inches  a  year. 

Professor  Worsade  makes  the  statement  that  woollen  cloth  was  found  with  the 
aboriginal  relics  of  the  Danish  peat. 

Where  the  Roman  general  Ostorius  cut  the  forests  of  Scotch  firs  in  Yorkshire,  the 


SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES.  69 

Ilatlielil  JNIoss  has  since  grown  over  an  area  of  ninety  thousand  acres.  At  tlie  Ijottoni 
of  the  peat,  many  feet  down,  Roman  axes  and  knives,  with  the  stumps  of  Scotch  hr, 
oak,  &c.,  were  found.  Many  of  the  trunks  were  hewn,  bored,  chopped,  and  split; 
and  rails,  wedges,  bars,  pieces  of  cliain,  horses'  skulls,  axes,  and  coins  of  the  Roman 
em23erors  were  found. 

In  Kincardine  Moss,  Scotland,  Roman  coins  were  found;  also  a 'Roman  military 
road-bed  of  timber,  over  whicli  eight  feet  of  peat  had  accumulated.  At  Griiningcn  a 
coin  of  tlie  Emperor  Gordian,  A.  D.  237,  was  found  under  tliirty  feet  of  peat.  In  the 
Jura  IMountains  old  iron  furnaces  are  found,  with  Roman  and  Gallic  coins  of  two 
thousanil  years  or  less  of  age.  Over  one  of  tliese  furnaces  twenty  feet  of  peat  had 
accumulated.  In  Derbj'shire  a  grazier  perished  on  a  lx)g  in  a  snow-storm.  Twenty- 
eight  years  after,  his  body  was  found  three  feet  deep  in  the  peat.  In  the  Natural 
History  of  Stafford,  it  is  stated  that  coins  of  Edward  IV.  have  been  found  eigliteen  feet 
down  in  the  peat.  Sir  Charles  Lyell  states  that  at  Lagore,  in  Ireland,  relics  of  stone, 
bronze,  and  iron  are  found  under  fifteen  feet  of  jjeat. 

In  the  seventeenth  century  the  Earl  of  Cromarty  described  to  the  Royal  Society 
the  origination  of  a  new  peat  bog,  which  in  less  than  fifty  years  covered  up  tlie  trunks 
of  trees  fallen  on  it,  and  was  thick  cnougli  to  be  cut  for  fuel.  It  is,  therefore,  hazard- 
ous to  argue  that  human  remains  found  in  peat  bogs  carry  back  the  origin  of  man  to 
anything  like  great  antiquity. 

Geologists  have  also  reasoned  that  human  remains  found  in  the  mud  deposits  of 
the  jNIississippi  prove  the  antiquity  of  the  human  race. 

General  Humphrey,  while  making  a  survey  of  the  river,  took  elaliorate  observa- 
tions during  twelve  months,  at  different  points,  to  determine  tlie  amount  of  sedimen- 
tary deposit.  He  made  it  equal  to  a  stratum  one  foot  in  depth  by  al)out  two  hundred 
and  seventy  square  miles  in  area  every  year. 

This  acftion  of  the  river  produces  many  interesting  phenomena,  and  has  led  to 
various  efforts  to  determine  tlie  antiquity  of  the  deposits.  In  digging  ff)r  the  gas 
works  in  New  Orleans,  tlie  skeleton  of  a  "Red  Indian"  was  founil,  according  to  Dr. 
Dowler,  at  the  depth  of  sixteen  feet,  and  beneath  four  successive  layers  of  cypress 
forest.  Dr.  Dowler  endeavored  to  get  an  estimate  of  the  general  rate  of  mud  accre- 
tion on  the  delta  where  New  Orleans  stands,  and  then,  assuming  it  to  be  both  coirect 
and  uniform,  estimated  that  it  would  require  fifty-seven  thousand  years  to  deposit  the 
si.xteen  feet  of  material  above  the  skeleton.  Lyell  was  inclined  to  ajiprove  the  calcu- 
lation; but  General  Humphrey,  in  his  elaljorate  survey,  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  whole  ground  of  New  Orleans  and  the  surrounding  country,  down  to  tlui  depth  of 
about  forty  feet,  was  only  four  thousand  four  hundred  j'-ears  old. 

Mr.  Fontaine,  IMr.  Ilurlbut,  and  others,  state  that,  owing  to  the  enormous  rapidity 
with  which  the  river  changes  its  course,  articles  lost  in  the  lifetime  of  men  now 
living  are  in  many  places  l)uried  one  hundred  fiset  deep.  Dr.  Andrews  saw  cotton- 
wood  saplings  on  the  banks,  with  only  seven  rings  of  annual  growth,  over  whose 


70  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

oi'iginal  roots  the  inundations  had  deposited  three  feet  of  clay.  There  are  streets  in 
New  Orleans  where  the  water  flowed  a  hundred  feet  deep  sixty  years  ago.  Mr.  Fon- 
taine gives  an  amusing  statement  that  information  reached  the  New  Orleans  Academy 
of  Sciences  tliat  a  piece  of  wood  had  been  found  at  Port  Jackson  deeper  down  than 
Dr.  Dowler's  "Red  Indian,"  and  at  a  considerable  distance  from  the  I'iver,  and,  more- 
over, showing  workmanship  by  a  high  order  of  tools.  Some  members  of  the  Academy 
investigated  the  relic,  and  found  it  to  be  the  gunwale  of  a  Kentucky  flat-boat. 

Says  Fontaine :  "  The  Mississippi,  by  undermining  and  ingulfing  its  banks  with 
everything  upon  them,  logs  tangled  in  vines  and  bedded  in  mud,  cypress  stumps, 
Indian  graves,  and  modern  works  of  art,  are  suddenly  swallowed  up  and  buried  at  all 
depths  by  its  waters,  from  ten  to  one  hundred  feet  in  depth."  No  scientist,  unless  he 
has  a  pet  theory  to  maintain,  would  think  of  estimating  lapse  of  time  from  this  class 
of  data. 

Mr.  H.  C.  Lewis,  volunteer  assistant  upon  the  Pennsylvania  Geological  Survey, 
at  the  recent  meeting  of  the  American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science, 
discussed  tlie  question  of  the  age  of  the  deposit  at  Trenton,  N.  J.,  containing  articles 
of  human  workmanship.  Dr.  Abbott  and  other  archasologists  have  claimed  for  these 
remains  an  antiquity  coeval  with  the  Glacial  period.  Mr.  Lewis  commenced  by  care- 
fully defining  the  absolute  and  relative  ages  of  all  the  clays  and  surfoce  dejwsits  of 
the  Lower  Delaware  Valley.  Three  clays  were  pronounced  to  be  of  Mesozoic  and 
Tertiary  age.  Next  came  the  Philadelphia  brick  clay,  stated  to  have  been  derived 
from  the  melting  of  the  ice  in  the  glacial  period.  No  true  glacial  deposits  exist 
south  of  the  terminal  moraine,  near  Easton,  as  first  pointed  out  by  Professor  G.  H. 
Cook.  After  the  clay,  three  gravel  deposits  were  laid  down :  first  one,  found  on  the 
tops  of  the  hills,  largely  composed  of  pebbles  of  Potsdam  sandstone ;  second,  a  red 
gravel,  referred  to  the  Cham  plain  period;  lastly,  the  Trenton  gravel  or  sand,  holding 
the  human  implements.  These  beds  are  therefore,  geologically  speaking,  extremely 
modern.  They  follow  the  Champlain  age,  in  which  it  is  supposed  human  relics  have 
been  found  elsewhere.  Perhaps  these  Trenton  beds  corres^jond  closely  in  age  to  the 
lower-level  gravels  of  the  River  Somme,  in  France.  Hence,  they  cease  to  be  of 
importance  in  fixing  a  great  antiquity  for  man  in  New  Jersey.  As  the  implements 
clearly  belong  to  the  Palaeolithic  age,  they  may  cause  archoBologists  to  bring  this 
ruder  human  period  nearer  to  our  own  times.  Mr.  Lewis  suggested  that  the  name 
of  Esquimaux  period  might  be  used  to  designate  the  period  of  the  formation  of  the 
Trenton  gravels. 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing  instances,  we  may  add  that  the  bones  found  at  Saint 
Prest,  in  France,  the  shell  marls  of  Leognan,  near  Bordeaux,  the  Halitherium  bones  at 
Puance',  and  the  flints  of  Thenay,  which  have  been  supposed  to  prove  Pliocene  or 
Miocene  men,  are  now  generally  rejected  by  all  careful  scientists  as  evidence  of  the 
early  antiquity  of  humanity. 

The  same  may  be  said  of  the  human  skeleton  found  in  volcanic  breccia,  near  Le 
Puy-en-Velay,  central  France,  the  flints  of  the  Somme  Valley,  the  skeleton  of  Colle 


SUPPLEMENTAL  NOTES.  Tl 

del  Vento,  in  Ligviria,  and  the  remains  dag  from  the  lava  beds  of  California,  wliieh 
were  for  a  time  thought  to  be  Preglacial.  There  is  no  cautious  geologist  Avho  does 
not  now  hesitate  to  employ  these  cases  in  support  of  the  great  antiquity  of  the  human 
race.  Scientilic  men  are  less  bold  than  formerly.  As  JNIr.  Southall  states  the  case, 
"  there  has  been  in  the  past  altogether  too  much  jissumption.  It  is  assumed  that  it  is 
unphilosopliical  to  admit  any  more  violent  energies  tlian  those  which  existing  opera- 
tions present;  it  is  assumed  that  the  Glacial  epoch  is  separated  from  our  days  by  a 
vast  cycle  of  time;  it  is  assumed  that  the  pliysical  geography  of  the  earth  has  not 
been  substantially  modified  for  tens,  or  hundreds,  or  thousands  of  years ;  it  is  assumed 
that  it  requires  long  ages  to  effect  the  extinction  of  a  fauna ;  it  is  assumed  that  eleva- 
tions and  subsidences  of  land  liave  occurred  at  the  rate  of  two  and  a  half  feet  in  a 
century ;  it  is  assumed  that  the  rivers  of  to-day  arc;  tlie  same  streams  with  tlie  same 
volume  of  water  which  existed  at  the  close  of  the  Glacial  period;  it. is  assumed  tliat  it 
requires  the  sequence  of  innumerable  centuries  to  effect  a  transition  from  a  harsh  to  a 
temperate  climate;  it  is  assumed  that  because  no  great  river-horses,  or  huge  probos- 
cisticus,  or  powerful  carnivores  roam  in  our  age  tlu-ough  civilized  Europe,  a  long  and 
protracted  period  must  have  intervened  since  the  hippopotamus  wallowed  in  the 
marshes  of  the  Tliames,  and  the  cave-lion  roared  on  the  Mendip  Hills.'"  The  address 
of  Professor  Ramsay,  President  of  the  British  Association,  at  its  meeting  in  August 
last,  was  an  attempt  to  show,  that,  whatever  may  have  been  the  state  of  the  earth 
long  before  geological  history  began,  all  known  formations  are  of  a  more  recent  date 
than  geologists  have  generally  supposed. 

Says  Cliancellor  Dawson: 

"  As  a  o-eoloo-ist,  and  as  one  who  has  been  in  the  main  of  the  school  of  Lyoll,  and 
after  having  observed  with  much  care  the  deposits  of  the  more  modern  periods  on 
both  sides  of  the  Atlantic,  I  have  from  the  first  dissented  from  those  of  my  scientific 
brethren  who  have  unhesitatingly  given  their  adhesion  to  the  long  periods  claimed  for 
human  iiistory,  and  have  maintained  that  their  hasty  conclusions  on  this  subject  must 
bring  geological  reasoning  into  disrejwte,  and  react  injuriously  on  our  noble  science. 

"  We  require  to  make  great  demands  on  time  for  the  pre-human  periods  of  the 
earth's  history,  but  not  more  than  sacred  history  is  willing  to  allow  for  the  modern  or 
human  age." 

While  thinking  of  this  subject  of  the  antiquity  of  man,  we  wonder,  first,  what 
skeptical  scientists  would  say  had  the  Bil)le  announced  that  man  has  been  upon  this 
earth  for  one  hundred  thousand  years,  and  that  he  originated  from  germs  that  came 
from  "meteoric  fragments,"  or  from  the  "ether  of  space;  "  second,  we  wonder  why 
the  Bible  did  not  make  some  of  these  statements. 

These  matters  were  certainly  under  quite  general  consideration  at  the  time  the 
Bible  was  written. 

Ancient  Persians  taught  that  a  tempest  was  the  universal  author  of  :dl  existences. 

The  Budilhist  tracts  say:  "The  world  appears  to  have  been  sclf-t'reated,  as  it  was 
natural  at  all  times  that  the  world  should  be  self-created,  and  also  perish  of  itself." 


72  SUPPLEMENTAL    NOTES. 

Thales,  tlie  IMilesian,  whom  Plutarch  regards  as  the  first  of  philosophers,  affirmed 
that  loafer  is  the  principle  whence  came  all  things  in  the  universe,  including  the  earth, 
the  stars,  and  the  gods,  and  into  water  all  these  things  shall  be  resolved. 

Anaximenes,  also  of  Miletus,  assigned  the  principle  of  all  being  to  air,  as  Profes- 
sor Barker  lately  assigned  it  to  the  ether  of  space.  Anaximenes  carried  his  views  con- 
siderably further  than  does  Professor  Barker,  claiming  that  as  all  things  came  from 
air,  so  all  things  in  the  end  will  return  to  air;  also  that  air  is  God.  Thus  also  Dio- 
genes, of  Apollonia,  taught  that  the  air  has  supreme  intelligence  and  is  a  creator. 
"  It  knows  much,"  he  said ;  "  for  it  has  ari'anged  things  in  the  best  and  most  beautiful 
manner."     Anaxagoras  held  that  liomogeneousness  is  the  cause  of  all  things. 

Pythagoras,  the  first  who  gave  to  philosophy  its  name,  deduced  the  origin  of  all 
things  from  arithmetical  numbers,  which  in  certain  combinations  result,  he  says,  in  a 
producing  force. 

Ileraclitus  and  Hippasus  held  that  fire  gives  being  to  all  things,  and  is  that  by 
Avhich  all  things  reach  their  end. 

We  repeat  the  question.  Why  did  the  Babylonians,  the  Egyptians,  the  As- 
syrians, the  peoples  of  India,  the  masses  of  China,  —  why  did  Herodotus,  Thales, 
Pythagoras,  Aristotle,  Plato,  Zeno,  Epicurus,  and  other  Greeks  and  many  Romans, 
dift'er  from  the  Book  of  Genesis?  These  men  looked  upon  the  same  skies,  walked  the 
same  earth,  had  before  them  the  same  sources  of  information  as  did  Moses.  Why  did 
they  not  reach  the  same  conclusions?  Or  how  may  we  explain  whence  the  great 
eJewish  lawgiver  obtained  information  that  enabled  him,  without  making  a  mistake, 
to  employ  words  that  so  exactly  answer  all  the  demands  of  modern  scholastic  criticism 
and  scientific  investigation?  It  must  be  allowed  by  every  thoughtful  person  that 
this  question  cannot  be  set  aside  with  a  sneer,  but  that  it  ought  to  arrest  attention, 
and  receive  from  us  sober  and  candid  thought  and  reply. 

Note  IX.     {Page  24.) 

It  has  generally  been  held  that  two  hundred  feet  of  the  summit  of  Mount  Wash- 
ington remained  aljove  the  waters  of  the  Drift.  But  Professor  Young  reported,  before 
the  late  meeting  of  scientists  in  Boston,  that  he  had  found  unmistakable  evidences  of 
drift-action  quite  near  the  summit.  Later,  after  the  adjournment  of  the  Association, 
many  of  the  members  went  on  an  excursion  to  the  top  of  Mount  Washington,  where 
they  inspected  the  evidences  of  glaciation  of  the  summit.  The  largest  transported 
bowlder  found  by  them  weighed  nearly  one  hundred  pounds,  and  corresponds  per- 
fectly with  the  rock  occurring  upon  Cherry  Mountain,  ten  miles  distant  and  three 
thousand  feet  lowei-  down.  Hence,  these  figures  express  the  distance  travelled  by 
this  bowlder,  both  horizontally  and  vertically,  in  the  Glacial  age.  The  rock  is  entirely 
unlike  that  of  Mount  Washington  itself;  and  as  the  bowlder  was  covered  by  the  pecu- 
liar lichens  growing  naturally  upon  the  summit,  it  could  never  have  been  brought 
there  by  human  agency.     The  specimen  has  been  taken  to  the  rooms  of  the  Boston 


SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES.  73 

Society  of  Natural  History.  Near  the  Signal  Service  station  may  be  seen  a  surface 
twenty  or  thirty  feet  long  that  has  been  evidently  planed  down  by  tlie  ice;  some  of 
tlie  surface  recently  uncovered  still  retaining  its  smoothness,  and  displaying  obscure 
stride  pointing  in  a  southeasterly  direction.  It  has  been  recent!}'  stated  by  Professor 
Hitchcock  that  numerous  moraines  cover  the  sides  of  Mount  Washington,  such  as 
were  made  in  the  decline  of  the  ice  period,  Avhen  the  glacier  gradually  retreated  to 
the  very  summit,  leaving  blocks  of  stone  arranged  in  curved  lines  or  loops,  with  the 
convex  side  lowest.  Inside  of  the  loops  the  ground  is  smooth,  comparatively  level, 
and  o-rassed  over,  representing  the  area  occupied  by  the  ice  before  it  melted;  while 
the  stones  occupy  the  steep  escarpment  of  the  terrace,  and  also  show  some  parallelism 
with  the  general  course  of  the  moraine. 

Note  X.     {Parje  24.) 

Says  Le  Conte:  "The  mammalian  fauna  of  the  Quaternary  era  was  almost  wholly 
peculiar,  differing  both  from  the  Tertiary  which  preceded,  and  from  the  Present  which 
followed  it." 

It  is  certainly  and  cleai'ly  evident  that  the  few  species  of  animals  whicli  may 
have  survived  the  Glacial  and  Drift  epochs  liad  a  difficult  struggle  for  existence. 
They  must  have  gone  without  mucli  delay  from  their  northern  retreats  to  the  distant 
uplands  of  the  Tropics,  and  then,  upon  the  change  of  that  intense  cold  to  the  milder 
temperature,  they  must  have  very  soon  passed  back  over  tlie  desolations  from  which 
they  had  been  compelled  to  escape.  From  the  nature  of  the  case,  but  very  few,  com- 
jmratively,  could  liave  survived. 

Cautious  geologists  are  ready  to  confess  that  the  number  of  survivors  is  by  no 
means  firmly  established. 

Note  XI.     {Page  24.) 

This  qualification  is  allowed,  because,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  few  sciences  have  had 
to  change  tlieir  hypothesis  more  frequently  than  geology.  As  to  the  point  now  under 
consideration,  it  may  turn  out  that  what  geologists  have  denominated  the  Lost  Inter- 
vals, which  we  have  called  "  nrghts,"  may  be  the  great  working  periods,  and  that  the 
so-termed  periods  of  activity  may  r<^ally  be  the  eras  of  repose.  Still,  wliichever  way 
viewed,  the  six  great  geological  divisions  remain  perfectly  distinct.  The  following 
additional  grouping  of  tlie  creative  periods  is  given  by  Dr.  Pliin  in  his  work  entitled, 
The  Chemical  History  of' the  Six  Bays  of  Creation: 


SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 


PERIOD. 

First  Day. 


Second  Day. 


Third  Day. 


Fourth  Day. 


THE   SIX  DAYS  OF  CREATION". 


T?   „   •   ™       f  results  from  the  primoval  darkness  existing 
^^^■^'"S       I  from  the  beginuiii-. 


Mornins 


Eveninn 


Morninnr 


Eveninr 


Morning 


Eveninuf 


Morninc 


esiilts  from  the  chemical  union  and  com- 
bustion of  the  elements. 


WORK  DONE. 

The  creation  of 
light,  or  the  calling 
into  activity  of  the 
physical  forces. 


esults  from  the  cooling  of  the  ashes  of  the 
Kreat  combustion. 


The    creation    of 
the  firmament,  or  the 
|-  arrangement  of  tlie 
esults  from  the  light  of  the  great  Central  j   heavenly  bodies  and 
Sun.  J   interstellar  spaces. 


esults  from  the  cooling  of  the  earth  and  the 
deposition  of  dense  clouds. 

results  from  the  clearing  away  of  the  clouds 
,  and  the  shining  of  the  Sun,  ilay  being  ren- 
1  dered  continuous  by  the  enormous  refractive 
[  power  of  the  primeval  atmosphere. 


1' 


esults  from  the  obscuration  of  the  Sun  by 


vapor. 


Elevation  of  the 
land,  that  is,  the  di- 
vision of  the  land 
and  water,  and  the 
creation  of  jslants. 


The  ordaining  of 
the  sun  and  moon  as 


results  from  the  precipitation  of  this  vapor 

and   the    clearing    of   the    atmosplicre,    the   j"  governors  of  day  and 

refractive    power   of  the    latter   being    still       uit^ht. 

sufficiently  powerful  to  produce  continuous 

day. 


Fifth  Day. 


Eveninfi 


Morning; 


results  from  the  separation  of  Venus  from  ] 

the  Sun.  j 


f  re; 
1  of 


esults  from  the  restoration  of  the  brilliancy   | 
the  Sun,  which  still  shines  continuously.    J 


Creation  of  fishes, 
reptiles,  and  birds. 


Sixth  Day. 


(      -^       .  f  results  from  the  separation  of  ^lercury  from 

I       ETcning       I  the  Sun. 


Mornin< 


results   from   the   restoration   of  the   Sun's 
brilliaucv. 


Creation  of  mam- 
mals and  man. 


Note  XII.     (Page  28.) 

Says  Mivart  in  concluding  an  article  entitled,  Likenesses,  or  Pliilusnjjhical  Ancdomy : 
"  The  teaching  of  what  we  believe  to  be  true  philosophy  is  that  the  types  shadowed 
forth  to  our  intellects  by  material  existences  are  copies  of  divine  originals,  and  cor- 
respond to  prototypal  ideas  in  God." 

Dr.  McCosh,  in  a  treatise  entitled,  The  Development  Hypothesis,  illustrates  the 
thought  before  us  tlius:  "We  see  branchings  in  the  old  club-mosses  and  the  sea- 
weeds in  anticipation  of  the  more  perfect  ramification  in  the  tree.     We  notice  flowers 


SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES.  7o 

radiating  like  the  shell-li^li  wliicli  come  at  a  later  date.  Insects  have  wings,  proplieti- 
cal  of  the  better  wings  of  birds.  In  the  reptilian  ages,  we  liave  monsters  standing- 
upright,  and  foretelling  the  erect  form  of  man.  There  are  tlms  in  nature  not  only 
material  causes,  but  final;  not  only  ellicient,  but  formal.  We  cannot  allow  this 
evolution  doctrine  to  shear  nature  of  its  grandeurs,  nor,  we  may  add,  morality  of  its 
binding  obligations,  or  the  universe  of  its  God." 

Note  XIII.     {Page  30.) 

At  this  point  we  call  attention  to  tha  fact  that  in  addition  to  tlie  Biblical  scholai's 
already  referred  to  who  favor  the  solar-day  theory  is  Dr.  Turner.  In  his  (Jommcutanj 
oil  Genesis  he  says :  "  It  is  evident  that  all  subsequent  sacred  \vriters  who  talce  notice 
of  the  creation  as  a  work  of  six  days  do  invariably  assume  a  literal  sense  of  the  word 
'  day.'  " 

Writers,  on  tlie  other  hand,  who  have  clung  quite  tenaciously  to  the  so-termed 
"scientific  periods,"  are  Dr.  Kurtz,  Cuvier,  De  Luc,  Jameson,  Hugh  Miller,  Donald 
McDonald,  Taylor  Lewis,  Chancellor  Dawson,  and  Professor  Dana. 

Note  XIY.     {Page  32.) 

The  darkness  of  this  day  is  well  stated  in  Dr.  Phin's  Chemical  History  of  the 
Creation  : 

"  We  have  all  seen  the  sun's  face  darkened  by  thunder-clouds  when  their  black 
masses  wei-e  driven  by  fierce  tempests  across  liis  disc.  From  the  cheerful  light  of  day 
the  change  to  intense  gloom  was  rapid.  The  birds  sought  the  densest  sliade,  the  wild 
beasts  fied  to  their  lairs,  and  men's  faces  grew  pule  as  they  gazed  upon  nature  and 
upon  each  other.  And  jet  all  this  was  produced  by  clouds  representing  at  most  but  a 
few  Indies  of  water. 

"Again,  we  have  seen  a  ligiit,  fleecy  cloud  of  vapor  floating  away  on  a  still  day 
from  a  passing  locomotive,  and  throwing  down  its  shadow  upon  th(j  green  fields  —  a 
shadow  black  as  ink.  ,  And  yet,  if  all  the  water  in  this  tiny  cloud  had  been  precipi- 
tated on  the  meadow  over  which  it  passed,  it  would  not  have  deposited  on  the  dark- 
ened area  a  depth  of  water  equal  to  the  tenth  of  an  incii. 

"What,  then,  must  have  been  the  darkness  of  that  night  when  the  clouds,  which 
Avrapped  the  earth  as  with  a  swaddling-band,  contained  water  suflicient  to  have  cov- 
ered the  whole  surfiice  of  the  earth  to  the  depth  of  from  four  to  five  miles  ?  " 

We  may  as  well  here,  as  elsewhere,  speak  of  tlie  Avord  translated  in  the  author- 
ized vei'sion  "firmament,"  which  w(;  liave  translated  "expanse;." 

The  word  in  the  oi-iginal  is  "  Rakia,"  whose  verb  meaning  is  to  stretch  or  spread 
out;  hence,  literally,  the  substantive  form  means  an  expansion  or  extension. 

That  a  "solid  vault"  need  not  be  meant  is  evident  from  other  passages,  as  "the 
fowl  of  the  solid  vault"  is  not  sense.  Thus  also,  "The  way  of  the  eagle  is  in  the 
solid  vault,"  and  "lie  causeth  his  wind  to  blow  in  the  solid  vault,"  make  no  sense. 


Y6  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

The  eavly  Jewish  lexicographers  translated  this  word  by  "  extension." 

David  Kimclii,  born  1160,  one  of  the  most  distinguished  Hebrews  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  gives  the  meaning  "expanse." 

All  the  early  Spanish  translators  use  the  word  Espandidura,  meaning  "  expanse." 

The  early  German  versions  —  those  by  Zunz,  Arnheim,  and  Sachs  —  assign  no 
other  meaning  than  that  of  "  expanse."     Luther  uses  the  word/es<e. 

The  next  group  of  authorities  is  found  among  the  French-Hebrew  scholars  who 
flourished  at  tlie  revival  of  learning. 

Vatablus,  Peter  Martyr,  and  John  Calvin  use  expansio  in  medio. 

So,  likewise,  Munster  in  1588,  Mercerus  of  the  same  date,  Osiander  in  1597, 
Valera  in  1G02,  use  estendimiento  en  medio. 

Another  group  of  authorities  is  found  among  German  scholars  of  early  date. 
Mariana,  162-i;  Ilottenger,  1659;  Schmidt,  1697;  Baumgarten, '  1749 ;  Zeller,  same 
date;  Sc'hults,  1783;    Datliius,  1791;   Ilgen,   1798;    and  Gesenius  in  his  lexicons  of 

1810-13. 

And  we  may  add  that  nearly  all  the  eminent  lexicographers  and  commentators 
of  the  present  century,  except,  of  course,  skeptical  writers  who  are  desirous  of  support- 
ino-  some  pet  theory,  or  who  are  determined  to  ma.ke  Moses  say  what  he  did  not  say, 
favor  the  foregoing  translation  of  rakia. 

Note  XV.     {Page  33.) 

A  third  w^ay  of  bringing  about  the  above  geological  results  would  be  by  the 
elevation  of  the  earth's  crust.  But  as  science  now  generally  insists  that  the  great 
upheavals  of  the  earth  have  been,  not  rapid,  but  gradual  and  uniform,  we  do  not 
include  this  method  in  our  enumeration.  Still,  doubtless,  we  should  have  a  perfect 
right  to  do  so.     (See  Note  VIII.) 

We  may  at  this  point  comment  upon  the  words  translated  "without  form  and 
void."  The  words  are  tohu  and  boJm,  confusion  and  emptiness;  or,  as  Luther  admira- 
bly renders  them,  lomte  nnd  leer.     The  Vulgate  translates  them,  inanis  et  vacua. 

It  may  be  remarked  that  these  terms  do  not  often  occur  in  Hebrew  Scriptures, 
and  yet  the  places  in  which  they  are  found  are  such  as  unquestionably  give  their  true 
meaning.  In  Deuteronomy  xxxii.  10,  tohu  is  used  of  the  waste,  wilderness,  or  desert 
in  which  the  eliildren  of  Israel  were  so  long  wandering.  In  Job  vi.  18.  it  denotes  the 
condition  of  the  streams  that  disappear  during  the  summer's  drought.  "Tli(!y  go  up 
(evaporate)  into  tohu ;  they  perish."  So  also,  in  Job  xii.  24.  we  read :  "  They  wander 
in  tohu,  where  there  is  no  path."  In  Isaiah  xxiv.  10,  tohu  is  applied  to  a  rumed  city. 
In  Isaiah  xl.  17,  23,  xli.  29,  xlix.  4,  lix.  4;  1  Samuel  xii.  21,  it  is  used  to  denote  what 
is  utterly  formless  and  worthless.  Besides  Genesis  i.  2,  there  are  two  other  places  in 
which  both  words  occur  together.  In  Jeremiah  iv.  24,  we  read:  " I  looked  upon  the 
e:irth,  and  it  was  tohu  and  hohu ;  I  looked  to  the  lieavens,  and  they  no  more  gave  theu' 
lio-ht."     "  In  tliis  strange  diorama  the  world  would  appear  to  be  going  back  agani 


SUrPLEMENTAL    NOTES.  77 

into  the  void  and  formless  period.  Tlie  mountains  aro  unsettling;  the  liills  move  to 
and  fro;  man  is  gone;  bird  and  beast  have  tied,  ami  are  to  be  seen  no  more.  The 
representation  strongly  suggests  Campbell's  and  Byron's  vision  of  tiie  Last  JNIan,  some 
features  of  which  miglit  seem  to  have  lieen  drawn  from  tliis  very  passage."  The 
ot])er  passage  is  Isaiah  xxx.  11.  Speaking  of  the  desolation  of  Idumea,  the  prophet 
says :  "  From  genei-ation  to  generation  shall  it  be  waste ;  forever  and  ever  shall  no 
one  pass  through  it;  for  He  will  stretch  upon  it  the  line  of  confusion  and  the  stones  of 
emptiness,"  —  the  line  tohu  and  the  stones  oiholiu. 

Note  XVI.     {Page  33.) 

While  many  elevations  and  subsidences  are  gradual,  as  lately  in  Chili  where 
there  Avere  a  series  of  small  paroxysms,  and  in  Sweden  where  the  movements  were 
almost  imperceptible,  j'et  these  facts  in  no  way  preclude  the  mighty,  sadden,  and 
destructive  changes  which  elsewhere  and  at  other  times  have  convulsed  tlie  earth. 

Note  XVII.     {Page  34.) 

In  a  recent  address  before  the  Torrey  Botanical  Club  of  New  York,  Dr.  Newl)erry 
argued  that  no  new  species  of  flora  —  to  any  extent  at  least  — -  has  appeared  on  the 
surface  of  the  earth  since  about  the  time  of  the  great  ice  period.  He  shows  that  the 
number  of  species  before  tlie  Arctic  irruption  was  much  greater  than  now.  As  the  ice 
flowed  south,  plants  were  driven  from  temperate  atmospheres  to  warmer  ones,  wliich 
did  not  agree  with  them,  and  in  some  cases  (like  the  Mediterranean  Sea)  met  barriers 
they  could  not  jiass,  and  consequently  were  destroyed.  A  few  on  the  American  Con- 
tinent could  go  further  south  than  the  same  kinds  in  Europe ;  hence  there  was  a  possi- 
ble chance  of  returning  when  the  ice  receded.  Fossil  remains  show  that  the  same 
species  existed  at  one  and  the  same  time  in  Japan  and  China,  in  Eurojie  and  in 
America.  None  of  these  exist  at  present,  except  as  fossils,  in  Euroj^e,  only  a  very 
few  in  America,  but  most  of  them  in  Japan.  The  ice  not  having  passed  much  below 
where  now  is  the  Potomac,  gave  a  chance  for  some  of  tlie  magnolias,  oaks,  cypresses, 
planes,  &c.,  to  get  back  gradually  over  the  area  left  by  the  receding  ice-fields.  In 
regard  to  the  introduction  of  new  classes  of  plants.  Dr.  Newberry  finds  no  evidence  of 
any  gradual  development  of  one  from  another.  He  finds  no  link  that  unites  the  naked- 
seed  class,  gijmnospcrms,  witli  those  enclosed  in  seed-vessels,  angiusperms. 

Note  XVIII.     {Page  35.) 

It  has  been  well  said  that  next  to  the  Bible,  in  its  imijortance  to  man,  stands  the 
almanac.  "The  first  nations  had  no  other  almanac  than  the  rolling  heavens.  Spring 
and  summer,  ploughing,  sowing  and  reaping  time,  were  regulat(;d  by  the  rising  and 
setting  of  certain  constellations."  Their  usefulness  is  referred  to  by  the  Greek  and 
Latin  poets  as. well  as  by  Bible  writers.  The  thought  is  happily  expressed  by  the 
old  poet  Aratus  in  the  beginning  of  his  Phenomena : 


'  o  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

"The  stars'  propitious  power  he  shows  to  men, 
And  high  in  heaven  firm  binds  their  ruling  sig?is." 

This  is  almost  a  free  translation  of  the  language  of  Moses :  "  He  set  them  in  the 
firmament  for  signs,  and  for  seasons,  and  for  days,  and  for  years."  Thus,  also,  Cicero 
sjieaks  of  the  stars  as  'Hhe  moderators  or  rulers  of  those  temporal  vicissitudes  by  the 
accurate  knowledge  of  which  man  is  distinguished  from  the  brute."  —  Tusc.  Quces. 
L,  28. 

Note  XIX.     {Page  42.) 
The  following  critical  discussion  of  the  Avord  hara  is  substantially  that  given 
some  years  since  by  Taylor  Lewis :  —  The  word  JS"ia  seems  to  borrow  some  shades  of  its 

TT 

meaning  from  the  kindred  root  ^-la,  which  has  the  sense  of  cleansing,  or  purification, 
from  the  primary  ideas  of  separating,  dividing,  purifying,  &c.  So  creation  is  a  clear- 
ing up,  a  cleansing,  or  a  bringing  into  order.  It  is  an  established  principle  of  inter- 
pretation that  the  best  understanding  of  the  radical  nature  of  any  word  is  where  both 
the  larger  and  the  more  specific  applications  seem  to  unite  in  the  same  image.  For  such 
a  ijassage  see  Joshua  xvii.  18,  where,  in  dividing  the  promised  land  among  the  tribes, 
it  is  said  to  the  sons  of  Joseph:  "The  mountain  shall  be  thine;  for  it  is  a  forest, 
'^^'^^'?.^>  'T-ncl  thou  shalt  clear  it,"  — literally,  cut  it,  hew  it,  separate  it,  clear  it  up.  The 
reference  is  to  the  operation  of  liringing  into  order  waste  forest  land,  or  turning  the 
chaos,  the  tohu  and  holm  of  the  wilderness,  into  a  well-arranged  and  cultivated  terri- 
tory. The  jH'imary  sense  of  the  Latin  creare,  Avhence  our  word  "create,"  is  somewhat 
.  different,  though  still  jjresenting  the  same  general  idea  of  gradual  process,  or  the 
production  of  one  thing  from  another.  This  primary  sense  of  creare  is  growth,  as  is 
more  clearly  seen  in  the  derivative  cresco,  and  as  it  manifests  itself  in  our  words 
"  inci-ease,"  "increment,"  &c.  The  generative  sense  is  still  more  plainly  exhibited 
in  the  comi^ounds,  whence  our  words  p?'ocreate,  recreate,  co»create,  »&c.  To  go 
still  farther  back  into  the  very  elements  of  the  ijrimitive  language,  there  cannot  be 
a  doubt  that  the  Latin  and  the  Anglo-Saxon  Avords  have  each  the  same  cognate 
radicals,  CR  and  GR,  and  that  therefore  CReo  and  GRoav  present  originally  the  same 
conception.     The  Greek  cpvaig  has  the  same  significance. 

Note  XX.     {Page  43.) 

Ilaeckel,  in  his  Ilistorji  of  Creation,  thus  states  the  case : 

"At  one  part  of  the  history  of  development  (t.  e.,  at  tlie  beginning)  Ave  must  have 
recourse  to  the  miracle  of  a  supernatural  creation  if  Ave  do  not  accept  the  hypothesis 
of  siwntaneous  generation.  The  Creator  must  in  that  case  have  created  the  first 
organism,  or  a  fcAv  organisms,  and  have  given  them  the  capability  of  developing 
further  in  a  mechanical  Avay.  I  leave  my  readers  to  choose  betAveen  this  idea  and  the 
hj'pothesis  of  spontaneous  generation." 

We  are  pei-fectly  willing  to  leave  our  readers   to  decide  between  these  two 


SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES.  79 

hypotheses,  ospeoially  since  there  is  not  tlie  sliglitest  evidence  of  the  origin  of  life 
tlirough  spontaneous  generation.     (See  pp.  43,  45,  46.) 

Note  XXI.     {Page  45.) 

"We  brietly  note  tlie  meaning  of  some  of  tlie  terms  here  employed.  A  protoplast 
is  a  tiling  lu'st  formed ;  jyrotoplasm  is  tlie  substance  out  of  which  this  first  thing  is 
formed.  It  is  chemically  the  viscid,  nitrogenous  material  in  all  vegetable  and  animal 
life-cells. 

Thus  also  of  the  terms  "bioplast"  and  "bioplasm."  A  hiojjiast  is  a  life-germ. 
Mechanically,  bioplasts  build  every  part  of  animals  and  plants.  Bioplasm  is  tiie 
chemical  composition  of  bioplasts.  The  dynamical  aggregates,  or  highly  differentiated 
life-stuff,  of  materialistic  jjhysicists,  the  proligerous  pellicles  of  M.  Pouchet,  the  plas- 
tide  particles  of  Bastian,  the  monas  of  O.  F.  Miillei*,  are,  except  in  name,  one  and  the 
'  same  things  Avith  these  bioplasts  treated  of  so  extensively  by  Professor  Real. 

But  not  one  of  these  men  can  give  us  any  light  as  to  the  origin  of  the  life  of  the 
bioplasts. 

Note  XXIL     {Page  49.) 

The  argument  of  Professor  Barker,  showing  that  the  protoplasm  of  plants  and  of 
animals  is  identical,  is  supported  by  the  following  facts : 

Though  the  protoplasm  of  vegetables  is  enclosed  within  a  cellulose  bag,  it  is 
only  a  closely-imprisoned  rhizopod.  A  still  more  striking  evidence  of  this  intimate 
relationship  has  been  developed  by  Darwin  in  his  researches  upon  insectivorous 
l^lants.  Not  only  do  these  j^lants  possess  a  mechanism  for  capturing  insects,  but  they 
secrete  a  gastric  juice  which  digests  them.  Another  most  curious  proof  of  the  iden- 
tity of  animal  and  vegetable  protoplasm  has  been  given  by  Claude  Bernard,  who  has 
shown  that  both  are  alike  sensitive  to  the  influence  of  anaesthetics.  A  sensitive-plant 
exposed  to  ether  no  longer  closed  its  leaflets  when  touched.  Assimilation  and  growth, 
as  well  as  germination,  are  aiTested  by  chloroform.  Schiitzenberger  has  proved  that 
the  fresh  cells  of  the  yeast  plant  breathe  like  an  aquatic  animal.  It  would  seem,  then, 
that  the  protoplasmic  life  of  animals  is  identical  with  that  of  plants ;  a  certain  measure 
of  destructive  metamori^hosis  taking  place  in  each,  evolving  energy  and  producing 
carbon-dioxide  and  water. 

But  it  may  be  I'emarked  that  upon  the  closest  examination  the  Professor  is  unable 
to  find  that  either  the  plant  or  the  animal  can  vitalize  protoplasm.  The  origin  of  life 
in  both  tile  plant  and  animal  is  shrouded  in  mystery. 

Note  XXIII.     {Page  50.) 

Some  of  our  readers  may  desire  to  know  the  distinction  made  between  mediate 
and  immediate  creation.  It  is  this:  When  the  Creator  produces  somcitliing  by  means 
of  an  intervening  object  or  agent,  the  action  is  termed  "mediate";  tliat  is,  if  the 


80  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

creative  act  enabled  the  soil  to  originate  plants  or  animals,  it  Avas  a  case  of  mccUafe 

creation. 

On  the  other  hand,  if  the  creative  act  originated  plants  and  animals  without  any 
intervening  object  or  agent,  it  was  a  case  of  immediate  creation. 

,     Note  XXIV.     (Page  50.) 
There   are   those  who   think   they   find   a   somewhat   stronger  warrant   for  the 
mediate  creation  of  vegetation  tlian  we  have  claimed.     The  following  is  from  l^rofes- 
sor  Taylor  Lewis  while  ccmimenting  upon  the  passage  before  us : 

"Here  are  two  distinct  things,  — the  going  forth  of  the  Omnific  Word,  as  in  the 
other  creative  periods,  and  the  productive  power,  energy,  or  energizing  of  the  eartli. 
This  latter  is  expressed  by  two  different  yet  kindred  Hebrew  verbs.  One  of  them, 
s^'il,  means  properly  to  germinate  (Greek  ^luairiaui ;  Vulgate,  germinare),  to  bud,  or 
to  sprout,  as  in  Joel  ii.  22:  'For  the  pastures  of  the  wilderness  do  spring,  the  tree 
beareth  fruit;  the  fig-tree  and  the  vine  do  yield  their  strength,'— (^f^Aciwr/^xe*'  lu  nedlu  — 
Quia  germinacerunt  speciosa  deserti.  There  it  is  applied  in  Kal  to  the  plant.  Here  in 
Iliplii'l  it  has  fin-  its  subject  the  earth,  — '  Let  the  earth  gernjinate,  or  cause  to  germi- 
nate.' It  is  the  casual  or  causative  conjugation ;  and  although  we  would  not  attach 
much  importance  to  this  standing  alone  and  unsupported  by  the  context,  yet,  in  the 
connection  in  which  Ave  here  find  it,  it  is  certainly  Avorthy  of  note.  The  other  HebreAV 
Avord  means  precisely  Avhat  the  English  does,  — to  come  forth;  and,  in  the  Iliphil  con- 
jugation Avhieli  is  here  used,  to  cause  to  come  forth,  or  out,  to  bring  forth,  —  to  give 
■  birth  to,  nasci  facere,  or  cause  to  be  born,  Avhich  is  the  special  sense  it  has  in  Job  x.  18, 
Isaiah  Ixv.  9,  and  other  places.  The  earth,  then,  was  not  a  mere  passive  recipient, 
nor  Avas  production  by  it  a  mere  outward,  unessential  mode,  having  no  other  than 
an  arbitrary  connection  Avith  the  divine  Avorking,  or  employed  merely  as  an  accom- 
panying sign;  but  the  earth  exerts  a  real  causative .poAver,  and  this  becomes  an  essen- 
tial and  important  part  in  the  chain  of  causation  Avhich  God  saAV  fit  to  originate  and 
establish.  The  divine  poAver  Avas  exerted;  but  it  Avas  upon  the  earth  and  through  the 
earth.  .  .  .  The  command  is  to  the  earth;  but  the  earth  is  not  passive.  She  exerts  an 
active  obedience  in  the  exercise  of  tlie  old  nature,  modified  by  the  neAV  force  Avhich 
comes  from  the  supernatural  Omnific  Word  going  forth,  as  it  previously  did  for  the 
separation  of  the  light  from  the  cliaos,  and  the  Avaters  from  the  Avaters.  Before  it 
was  said,  '  Let  there  be  light ; '  and  noAV  again.  Let  there  be  life,  —  and  life  began  to  be. 
As  in  all  the  other  periods,  so  here  there  Avas  doubtless  the  instantaneous  beginnmg 
of  a  neAV,  and  at  first  supernatural,  force  put  into  nature.  Vegetable  life  liad  a 
moment  Avhen  it  began  to  be,  — a  ncAV  thing  upon  tlie  earth,  unborn  and  undeveloped 
out  of  anything  previously  existing.  The  earth,  by  any  natural  poAvpr  previously 
imparted  or  i^reviously  exercised,  Avould  never  have  produced  it;  but  tlien,  Avhen  the 
ncAV  energy  is  imparted,  the  mode,  or  law  of  production,  is  through  tlie  earth.  .  .  . 
The  first  plants  grew ;  they  Avere  made  to  gi'OAv  in  the  earth,  and  by  the  earth,  and 


SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES.  81 

out  of  tlio  earth.     They  were  born  of  the  earth;   they  were  carried  in  her  womb- 
durin"-  their  respective  periods  of  gestation;  their  eml)ryo,  or  foetal,  life  was  fed  from 
her  warmth  and  moisture ;  and  they  afterwards  were  nurtured  and  grew  up,  eaeli  to 
its  perfection,  on  her  maternal  bosom.     They  grew;  and  growth  is  tlie  cardinal  idea 
of  the  word  'nature.'  " 

It  may  also  be  noted  in  this  connection  that  it  is  claimed  as  establislied  by  nearly 
all  scientists,  tliat  during  geological  periods  the  species  arose  in  gi-oups  of  like  forms 
in  many  parts  of  the  world  at  once. 

Note  XXV.     {Page  52.) 

It  should  be  obsei-ved,  however,  that  the  difi'erence  between  man  and  the  lower 
orders,  Biblically  considered,  is  not  made  out  from  single  words  and  phrases.  The 
ditterence  is  deducible,  rather,  from  the  combined  force  of  the  entire  context,  supported 
by  numerous  facts.  "  Man,"  says  the  Scripture,  "became  a  living  soul  "  ^-^j  IUE:^  . 
But  the  animals  also  are  spoken  of  as  having  nephesh  hmjya,  breath  of  life,  or  soul 
of  life,  or  living  soul.  It  is  the  general  term  for  animation,  like  the  Greek  ^)v■/,■^, 
Euiljv/oi,  including  all  that  is  not  matter,  whether  we  call  it  life,  sense,  feeling,  or 
intellect,  from  the  lowest  sentient  to  the  highest  ]-ational  being. 

Note  XXVI.     {Page  52.) 

It  is  remarkable  that  sci(jntific  men  are  quite  generally  inclined  to  make  a  dis- 
tinction between  man  and  the  rest  of  ci-eation.  The  author  of  Life  :  its  True  Genesis, 
is  in  general  representative.     He  says  : 

"  The  iirimordial  germs  of  all  living  things,  man  alone  excepted,  are  in  them- 
selves upon  the  eartli,  and  they  severally  make  their  appeai-ance,  each  after  its  kind, 
whenever  and  wherever  tlie  necessary  environing  conditions  exist." 

Virchow  and  Agassiz  hold  substantially  the  same  view;  also  Professor  Dana, 
who  says : 

"  For  the  develojjment  of  man,  gifted  with  higli  reason  and  will,  and  thus  made  a 
l^ower  above  nature,  there  was  required,  as  Wallace  has  ui-ged,  a  special  act  of  a 
Being  a])ove  nature,  whose  supreme  will  is  not  only  the  source  of  natural  law,  but  the 
working  force  of  nature  herself." 

Says  Le  Conte : 

"  From  the  purely  structural  and  animal  point  of  view,  man  is  very  closely 
united  with  the  animal  kingdom.  He  has  no  department  of  his  own,  but  belongs 
to  the  vertebrate  department,  along  with  quadrupeds,  birds,  reptiles,  and  fishes.  He 
has  no  class  of  his  own,  but  belongs  to  the  class  Mammalia,  along  with  quadrui3eds. 
Neither  has  lie  an  order  of  his  own,  but  belongs  to  the  order  of  Primates,  along  with 
monkc}  ,,  lemurs,  &c.  Even  a  family  of  his  own,  the  hominida3,  is  grudgingly  admit- 
ted by  soi,ie.  But  from  the  psycliical  point  of  view,  it  is  simply  impossible  to  over- 
estimate tiiC  space  which  separates  man  from  all  lower  things.     Man  must  be  set  off, 

6 


82  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

not  only  against  the  animal  kingdom,  but  against  the  whole  of  nature  besides  as  an 
equivalent.     Nature  the  book,  the  revelation,  and  man  the  interpreter. 

"  So  in  the  history  of  the  earth.  From  one  point  of  view  the  era  of  man  is  not 
equivalent  to  an  ei'a,  nor  to  an  age,  nor  to  a  period,  nor  even  to  an  epoch.  But  from 
another  point  of  view  it  is  the  equivalent  of  the  whole  geological  history  of  the  earth 
besides.  For  the  histoiy  of  the  esixXh  finds  its  consummation,  and  its  interpreter,  and  its 
significance  in  man" 

Note  XXVII.     {Page  52.) 

While  holding  to  the  view  that  there  has  been  a  kind  of  evolution  in  the  creation 
and  fitting  up  of  the  physical  universe,  we  still  insist  that  there  is  no  evidence  that 
the  evolution  discovered  is  anything  except  a  divine  execution,  according  to  a  pre- 
viously existing  plan.  Evolution  has  no  power;  it  is  simply  a  method.  This  kind  of 
evolution  is  strictly  Scriptural.     (See  Ps.  cxxxix.  15,  16  ) 

Matter,  likewise,  has  no  intrinsic  power;  at  least,  none  has  yet  been  discovered. 
It  can  evolve  or  produce,  only  as  acted  upon  by  some  power  outside  itself. 

Darwin  was  not  atheistic  in  his  conclusions ;  but  certain  materialists  have  since 
carried  his  views  so  far  as  to  deny  all  supernatural  agency.  But  these  extreme  views 
can  be  condemned  upon  strictly  scientific  grounds.  They  are  self-condemned.  There 
are,  for  instance,  fatal  breaks  in  the  line  of  succession.  There  are  new  species  repeat- 
edly appearing  for  Avhich  no  vestiges  of  ancestors  can  be  found.  To  the  claim  that 
we  may  yet  discover  the  intermediate  links  and  the  producing  ancestors,  it  has  been 
well  replied  that  "for  the  present  we  must  suit  our  hypothesis  to  the  facts;  and  the 
facts  show  wide  gaps  in  the  succession."  Haeckel  has  tried  to  derive  the  higher 
plants  from  alg^'B,  or  sea-weeds.  "Nothing,"  saj's  Dr.  Dawson,  "could  more  curiously 
contradict  actual  facts.  Algfe  were  apparentl^^  in  the  Silurian  neitlier  more  nor  less 
elevated  than  in  the  modern  seas ;  and  those  forms  of  vegetable  life  which  may  seem 
to  bridge  over  the  space  between  them  and  the  land  plants  in  the  modern  period  are 
wanting  in  the  older  geological  periods,  while  land  plants  seem  to  start  at  once  into 
being  in  the  guise  of  club-mosses,  a  group  by  no  means  of  low  standing.  Our  oldest 
land  plants  thus  represent  one  of  the  highest  tyjoes  of  that  cryptogamous  series  to 
which  tliey  belong,  and,  moreover,  are  better  developed  examples  of  that  type  than 
those  now  existing.  We  may  say,  if  we  please,  that  all  the  connecting  links  have 
been  lost;  but  this  is  begging  the  whole  question,  since  nothing  but  the  existence  of 
such  links  could  render  the  hypothesis  of  derivation  possible."  The  same  eminent 
authority  assures  us  that  "  there  are  forms  of  life  in  the  Silurian  which  cannot  be 
traced  to  the  Cambrian,  and  which  relate  to  new  and  even  prosjiective  conditions 
which  the  unaided  powers  of  the  animals  of  the  earlier  j^eriod  could  not  have  provided 
for."  Some  well-known  American  geologists,  in  order  to  escape  the  involved  difficul- 
ties, have  favored  the  theory  that  instead  of  an  unbroken  series  there  has  been  once 
and  again  the  sudden  and  abrupt  introduction  of  new  species ;  they  cannot  tell  how. 
But  this  is  begging  the  entire  question  when  one  attempts  thus  to  do  away  with  the 
supernatural. 


SUPPLEMENTAL  NOTES.  83 

The  two  classes  of  facts,  however,  which  have  figured  most  largely  in  support  of 
pure  naturalistic  evolution  are  those  connected  with  embryonic  phenomena  and  rudi- 
mentary organs.  Haeckel  argues  that  embryonic  phenomena  prove  the  descent  of 
the  various  species  of  animals  fi'om  a  common  parentage  by  the  operation  of  the  law 
of  "natural  selection"  and  the  "survival  of  the  fittest."  lie  shows  that  the  hunf.iu 
foetus  in  the  womb  passes  successively  through  the  forms  of  fish,  reptile,  and  quadru- 
ped before  developing  into  man.  We  each  in  our  unborn  state  have  gone  through 
these  metamorjihoses.  And  tliis,  with  all  Darwinists,  Haeckel  claims  is  proof  that 
the  human  race  has  been  "  generatively  descended  and  derived  through  these  suc- 
cessive gradational  races."  Now,  while  this  is  a  wonderful  parallelism,  it  is  no 
proof.  "There  is  no  logical  or  causative  relation  discernible,"  says  a  careful  scholar, 
"  between  the  two  lines  of  succession.  The  embryo,  in  its  successive  transformation, 
is  an  image  or  picture  of  the  evolutional  transformation  through  which  tlie  external 
animal  world  passes.  One  shows  no  causation  of  the  other,  and  the  embryonic  series 
only  illustrates  the  fact  that  there  is  an  order  of  creation.  But  be  it  specially  here 
noted,  it  does  not  illustrate  a  generative  order.  The  succeeding  stage  of  the  foetus  is 
not  horn  of  tiie  preceding  stage.  It  f;iils,  therefore,  in  the  very  vital  ])oint  of  illus- 
trating the  (jeneratlve  descent  of  later  animal  species  from  earlier.  The  embr3'onic 
stages  are  produced  simply  by  changes  of  the  relative  positions  of  the  molecules;  but 
these  changes  do  not  embrace  the  process  of  sexual  concurrence,  parturition,  and 
birth.  If  I  take  a  mass  of  putty  and  manipulate  it  through  exactly  the  same  changes 
of  form,  I  have  precisely  imaged  the  embryonic  image  of  external  evolutionarj^  ani- 
mal developments,  and  the  successive  stages  are  most  surely  not  genetically  con- 
nected. The  successive  changes  of  shape  —  that  is,  the  successive  changes  of 
molecular  position  —  are  produced  by  the  interposition  of  the  formative  forces  pro- 
ceeding from  the  hands.  The  jirocess  is  an  admirable  image  of,  and  comment  on,  the 
JNIosaic  text  of  the  creative  order  of  succession.  It  illustrates  the  divine  fact  that  man 
is  a  mici'ocosm,  a  miniature  of  the  macrocosm,  summing  \\\)  all  his  created  predeces- 
sors in  himself,  and  rising  in  himself  above  them  all.  If  tliere-liad  been  so  many 
successive  liirtlis  in  tlie  womb  of  siKcesAivG  foetuses,  it  would  have  been  an  illustration 
of  Darwinism.  But  being  only  a  formal  succession,  so  far  as  it  is  proof  it  establishes 
a  formative,  but  not  a  generative  succession.  But  whatever  the  external  form  of  a 
\m\niin  foetus,  it  never  was  at  any  stage  a  real  fish,  or  tortoise,  or  dog.  From  the  first 
seminal  element  to  the  birth  it  was  a  man  and  nothing  else;  that  is,  there  resided  in 
tlie  human  s(;minal  essence  at  the  first  the  formative  power,  superior  to  and  overmas- 
tering all  its  forms,  which  did  not  reside  in  that  of  the  lower  animals." 

Rudimentary  organs,  likewise,  are  claimed  to  estaljlish  the  doctrine  of  materialistic 
evolution.  JNIr.  Darwin  tells  us  that  the  boa-constrictor  has  in  the  liinder  part  of  the 
body  some  useless  little  bones,  whicli,  as  he  supposes,  are  the  remains  of  lost  hind 
legs.  The  mammals  of  the  whale  tribe,  which  have  only  fully  developed  fore  legs 
(l)reast  fins),  have,  further  back  in  the  body,  another  pair  of  utterly  superfluous  bones, 
wliich  are  claimed  to  be  the  remnants  of  undeveloped  hind  legs.     Now  these,  and  a 


84  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

gi'eat  variety  of  other  rndimentaiy  organs,  Darwin,  Tyndall,  Huxley,  and  others 
declare  are  utterly  inexj^lieable  on  any  theory  exce^it  that  of  evolution. 

In  brief,,  it  will  l^e  noticed,  that,  according  to  the  theory  of  evolution,  the  animal 
must  always  be  developed  upwards,  for  deterioration  inevitably  tends  to  ultimate 
destruction.  But  what  are  the  facts  in  the  case.f*  If  the  useless  bones  in  the  hinder 
l^art  of  the  boa-constrictor  ai'e  rudiments  of  lost  hind  legs,  then  it  has  been  developed 
to  its  present  condition  from  an  animal  that  had  legs  and  could  walk ;  that  ancestor 
was  developed  from  a  former  ancestor  that  had  no  legs,  as  the  common  ancestor  had 
none.  But  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  possession  of  legs  is  an  advantage  over  the 
non-possession  of  them.  Hence,  the  logical  conclusion  is  that  natiu'al  selection,  which, 
according  to  Darwin,  "works  on  for  ages  unerringly,  preserving  every  improvement 
and  destroying  that  which  has  deteriorated,"  did  develop,  by  almost  countless  slight 
successive  modifications  from  some  legless  fish  or  mollusk,  the  boa-constrictor  with 
legs,  thereby  improving  its  condition ;  but  afterwards,  through  other  almost  countless 
generations,  finally  "aborted  and  took  from  it  its  legs,  leaving  in  their  place  these 
little  bones,  for  no  other  apparent  reason  than  to  aid  evolutionists  in  proving  descent 
by  transmutation." 

The  evolutionist  also  says  that  the  hump  on  the  camel's  back  strengthens  the 
back  and  aids  in  carrying  heavy  loads.  He  therefore  claims  that  the  hump  was 
developed  by  the  necessity  for  its  existence.  This  argument  is,  however,  anything 
but  convincing  to  a  thoughtful  mind,  since  the  hump  is  not  of  "an  osseous  nature," 
does  not  strengthen  the  back,  and  existed  long  before  the  camel  ever  carried  a  load. 

Professor  Ilaeckel  still  further  theorizes  that  the  whole  family  of  whales  and  fish 
mammals  (cetacea)  were  developed  out  of  hoofed  animals.  But  if  this  is  the  case, 
then,  as  has  well  been  asked,  "Why  is  the  whale  the  only  one  which  has  the  rudi- 
mentary hind  legs?  And  if  the  theory  is  correct,  evolution  spent  a  hundred  million 
years  in  evolving  a  fish  into  a  bull,  horse,  elk,  or  some  other  hoofed  animal,  and  then 
spent  another  hundred  million  years  in  degrading  it  back  into  a  fish  again,  thus  pro- 
ducing an  efiect  the  exact  opposite  of  evolution ;  a  transformation  from  the  complex 
and  heterogeneous  back  into  the  simple  and  homogeneous. 

Many  genuine  fishes,  we  are  told  by  Professor  Haeckel,  have  lost  their  hind  legs. 
But  if  this  is  the  case,  then  "they  have  been  developed  downward  toward  the  mollusk, 
and  evolution  works  both  ways,  which  is  absurd,  for  then  below  the  lowest  Silurian 
strata  may  be  found  dejDosits  containing  the  remains  of  fishes,  reptiles,  birds,  mam- 
mals, monkeys,  and  men.  Once  admit  that  matter  is  eternal,  and  it  would  be  easy  to 
imagine  this  see-saw  operation  going  on  from  eternity  —  natural  selection  putting 
legs  upon  a  fish  and  making  it  a  cow,  and  again  taking  them  off  and  making  it  a  fish !  " 

Mr.  Darwin  is  sorely  puzzled  over  the  foot  that  the  dngong  and  lamantin,  which 
must  have  been  developed  into  their  present  condition  much  more  recently  than  the 
whale,  have  no  rudiments  of  legs  at  all ;  but  it  seems  never  to  have  occurred  to  him 
that  possibly  neither  they  nor  the  whale  ever  had  any  legs,  and  that  the  boa  may 
never  have  been  anything  but  a  snake.     The  simple  fact  is  that  this  theory  of  rudi- 


SUPPLEMENTAL    NOTES.  8o 

nu'iitaiy  organs  is  simpl}'  a  muddle  in  the  brains  of  its  expounders,  which  not  even 
IJiVwin  pretends  to  understand.  The  theory  of  type  and  antitype,  rather  than  evolu- 
tion, is  the  natural,  easy,  and  scientific  solution  of  this  class  of  phenomena. 

Note  XXVIII.     {Page  bQ,.) 

The  histoiy  of  evolution  theories  is  interesting.  Since  the  time  of  Augustine, 
who  thought  that  animals,  by  the  jjower  of  God,  might  have  come  from  tlie  slime  of 
the  earth,  scientific  men  have  generally  held  that  all  plants  came  from  seed,  and  all 
animals  from  animal  parentage.  But  there  have  arisen,  from  time  to  time,  those  wlio 
denied  the  commonly  accepted  doctrine.  De  Maillet,  at  the  beginning  of  the  last  cen- 
tury, argued  that  animals  were  originally  formed  in  the  waters  which  covered  the  earth, 
and  were  transferred  to  the  land  when  it  emerged,  and  then  suited  themselves  to  their 
new  external  circumstances.  Lamarck,  in  1801,  started  the  theory  that  there  is  "an 
inherent  principle  of  improvement  in  plants  and  animals,  and  that  external  conditions 
working  on  this  produced  gi'adually  variations  of  species,  which  gave  rise  to  new 
species,  genera,  and  orders."  The  Vestiges  of  the  Natural  Historrj  of  Creation,  issued 
in  1844,  produced  a  profound  impression.  It  was  ingeniously  argued  by  the  author 
that  "creation  took  place  according  to  law;  and  in  particular,  that  simply  a  prolonga- 
tion of  the  time  of  the  development  in  the  Avomb  may  give  rise  to  a  higher  type.'' 
Universal  attention  was  called  to  the  subject  of  development  when,  in  1858,  Charles 
Darwin,  a  very  careful  observer,  published  his  work,  Origin  of  Impedes  by  Means  of 
Natural  Selection,  or  the  Preservation  of  Favored  Paces  in  the  Struggle  for  Life. 

Note   XXIX.      {Page  57.) 
See  Note  XXV.,  p.  81. 

■ 
Note  XXX.      {Page  59.) 

The  similarity  of  method  adopted  by  the  "God-said"  in  the  creation  of  the  first 
human  pair,  and  by  the  "  God-word  "  in  working  miracles  in  Judea,  is  striking.  (See 
Luke  xxii.  49-51;  John  xi.  1-54;  Luke  vii.  11-16;  John  ix.  1-38;  Mark  viii.  22-26; 
John  ii.  1-11.) 

Note  XXXI.     {Page  60.) 

We  may  note  the  following  opinions  of  distinguished  men  as  to  the  unity  of  the 
human  race : 

Adelung,  in  his  great  work  uiwn  Language,  sa)^s:  "Asia  has  been  in  all  times 
regarded  as  the  country  where  the  human  race  had  its  beginning,  received  its  first 
education,  and  from  which  its  increase  was  spread  over  the  rest  of  the  globe.  Tracing 
the  people  up  to  tribes,  and  the  tribes  up  to  families,  we  are  conducted  at  last,  if  not 
by  history,  at  least  by  the  tradition  of  all  old  people,  to  a  single  pair,  from  which 
families,  tribes,  and  nations  have  been  successively  produced." 


gg  SUPPLEMENTAL   NOTES. 

Says  Dr.  John  Charles  Hall,  in  his  Introduction  to  Pickering's  Baces  of  Men : 
"  We  are  fully  satisfied  that  all  the  races  of  man  are,  as  the  Gospel  clearly  expresges 
it,  '  of  one  blood,'  —  the  black  man,  red  man,  and  the  white  man  are  links  in  one 
great  chain  of  relationship,  and  alike  children  which  have  descended  from  one  com- 
mon parent." 

Buffon,  in  his  Natural  History,  says:  "Every  circumstance  concurs  in  proving 
that  mankind  are  not  composed  of  species  essentially  difi"erent  from  each  other;  on 
the  contrary,  there  was  originally  but  one  species,  which,  after  multiplying  and 
spreading  on  the  whole  surface  of  the  earth,  has  undergone  various  changes  by  the 
influences  of  climate,  food,  mode  of  living,  epidemic  diseases,  and  the  mixture  of  dis- 
similar individuals." 

Dr.  Prichard,  in  his  Physical  History  of  Mankind,  after  speaking  of  the  higher 
endowments  of  mankind,  concludes  thus :  "  When  we  compare  this  fact  with  the 
observations  which  have  been  heretofore  fully  established  as  to  the  specific  instincts 
and  separate  physical  endowments  of  all  the  distinct  tribes  of  sentient  beings  in  the 
universe,  we  are  entitled  to  draw  confidently  the  conclusion  that  all  human  races  are 
of  one  species  and  one  family.'''' 

W.  Lawrence,  F.R.S.,  in  his  Lectures  on  the  Natural  History  of  Man,  says:  "The 
human  species  has  numerous  distinctive  marks  by  which,  under  every  circumstance 
of  deficient  or  imperfect  civilization  and  every  variety  of  climate  and  race,  it  is  sepa- 
rated by  a  broad  and  clearly-defined  interval  from  all  other  animals." 

Chancellor  Dawson,  in  Nature  and  the  Bible,  after  surveying  the  early  history  of 
man,  says:  "We  may  so  surely  conclude  that  all  the  above  coincidences  cannot  be 
accidental,  and  that  what  we  know  of  primitive  man  from  geological  investigation 
presents  no  contradiction  to  the  history  of  his  origin  in  the  Bible,  but  rather  gives 
such  corroboration  as  warrants  the  expectation,  that,  as  our  knowlelge  of  prehistoric 
men  increases,  it  will  more  and  more  fully  bring  out  the  force  of  those  few  and  bold 
touches  with  which  it  has  pleased  God  to  enable  his  ancient  prophets  to  sketcli  the 
.   early  history  of  our  species." 


^« 


